 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| People v. Tolin, Case Number: 06PDJ047,
SUPREME COURT OF COLORADO, PRESIDING DISCIPLINARY JUDGE, November 3, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Attorney was disbarred in Missouri after his client's identifying information was stolen from his office by his friend and the attorney intentionally failed to inform client of the theft of her identity; Supreme Court of Colorado held reciprocal discipline should be imposed and, under Colo. R. Civ. P. 251.21(d), attorney was disbarred in Colorado.
|
|||||
| Cent. Colo. Water Conservancy Dist. v. City of Greeley (In re Water Rights), Consolidated Cases, Case No. 05SA120, Case No. 05SA121,
SUPREME COURT OF COLORADO, November 6, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Water district sought to change water right. Applications were opposed by public entities, associations, and companies. Supreme court rejected district's argument that different result would be reached from decree limiting ditch company's water right to 344 acres because expanded irrigation was not part of historic use and 1882 decree was absolute.
|
|||||
| Gallegos v. Colo. Ground Water Comm'n, Case No. 05SA253,
SUPREME COURT OF COLORADO, November 6, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a water rights dispute, family bore burden of proving to Colorado Ground Water Commission that pumping of ground water injured family's surface water rights because Colorado had adopted modified appropriation doctrine with respect to these water rights, pursuant to Colorado Ground Water Management Act, Colo. Rev. Stat. §§ 37-90-101 to -143.
|
|||||
| Sanco Indus. v. Stefanski, Case No. 05SC814,
SUPREME COURT OF COLORADO, November 6, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Independent medical examiner's determination of a workers' compensation benefits claimant's maximum medical improvement (MMI) was binding; after claimant received additional treatment, employer and insurer had duty to return employee to the examiner for a follow-up examination and MMI determination under Colo. Rev. Stat. §§ 8-42-107 and 8-42-107.2.
|
|||||
| Williams v. Kunau, Case No. 06SC93,
SUPREME COURT OF COLORADO, November 6, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Workers' compensation benefits claimant's action was improperly closed. When the claimant received a second finding of MMI after a Workers' Compensation Division independent medical exam (DIME), the employer's insurer could not submit a final admission of liability until the claimant received a second DIME under Colo. Rev. Stat. § 8-42-107.2(2)(b).
|
|||||
| People v. Ferrigno, 06PDJ091.,
SUPREME COURT OF COLORADO, PRESIDING DISCIPLINARY JUDGE, November 7, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| People v. Turner, 05PDJ080 (consolidated with 05PDJ083 and 06PDJ089).,
SUPREME COURT OF COLORADO, PRESIDING DISCIPLINARY JUDGE, November 9, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| People v. Turner, 05PDJ080 consolidated with 05PDJ083 and 06PDJ089,
SUPREME COURT OF COLORADO, PRESIDING DISCIPLINARY JUDGE, November 9, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Hartmann v. Nordin, Case No. 06SA51,
SUPREME COURT OF COLORADO, November 13, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court did not err by ordering husband to answer deposition questions about patient's family's medical history because she impliedly waived her physician-patient privilege under Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-90-107(1)(d) to such information by directly placing at issue cause of her stroke in claiming that defendants' malpractice caused it.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
