21 Colorado opinions name it 2 courts 1983–2020 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Colorado courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Clark v. District Court, Second Judicial District, City & County of Denvergreen2 sentences1993She acknowledges that the burden of establishing the applicability of the attorney-client privilege rests with the claimant of the privilege, Clark v. District Court, 668 P.2d 3, 8 (Colo.1983), but asserts that this burden was met by her reliance on B.B. v. People, 785 P.2d 132 (Colo.1990). 1993She acknowledges that the burden of establishing the applicability of the attorney-client privilege rests with the claimant of the privilege, Clark v. District Court, 668 P.2d 3, 8 (Colo.1983), but asserts that this burden was met by her reliance on B.B. v. People, 785 P.2d 132 (Colo.1990). | 5 | 6 |
Williams v. Peoplegreen2 sentences1990The claimant of a privilege bears the burden of establishing the applicability of the privilege, Williams v. People, 687 P.2d 950 (Colo.1984), and the privilege is applicable in criminal and civil cases alike. 1988The burden of establishing the applicability of the privilege rests with the claimant of the privilege." Williams v. People, 687 P.2d 950, 953 (Colo.1984) (citations omitted). | 2 | 4 |
Nelson v. Grissomgreen2 sentences1984Clark v. District Court, Second Judicial District, 668 P.2d 3, 8 (Colo.1983); see also Nelson v. Grissom, 152 Colo. 502, 505 , 382 P.2d 991, 993 (1963). 1984Clark v. District Court, Second Judicial District, 668 P.2d 3, 8 (Colo.1983); see also Nelson v. Grissom, 152 Colo. 502, 505 , 382 P.2d 991, 993 (1963). | 2 | 2 |
People v. District Court in & for the City & County of Denvergreen2 sentences1990E.g., People v. District Court, 719 P.2d 722, 725 (Colo.1986). 1987People v. District Court, 719 P.2d at 724 . | 1 | 3 |
Open Door Ministries v. Lipschuetzgreen1 sentence2020As we have more recently made clear, “[t]he nature of the injury alleged—not the relief requested—is the primary inquiry to determine whether the CGIA applies to [a] claim.” Open Door Ministries v. Lipschuetz, 2016 CO 37M , ¶ 16, 373 P.3d 575, 579 (emphasis added). 9 To determine whether a claim “could lie in tort” for purposes of the CGIA, we should look to whether the claimant is asserting injuries arising out of a “breach of a general duty of care,” Brown, 182 P.3d at 691 , “regardless of whether that may be . . . the form of relief” provided by the cause of action in question or sought by | 1 | 1 |
People v. Pressleygreen1 sentence2011People v: Pressley, 804 P.2d 226, 227 (Colo.App.1990). | 1 | 1 |
Alcon v. Spicergreen1 sentence2007See Alcon, 113 P.3d at 739 (“The claimant of the privilege bears the burden of establishing the applicability of the privilege.”). | 1 | 1 |
People v. Reynoldsgreen2 sentences1990See People v. Reynolds, 195 Colo. 386 , 578 P.2d 647 (1978). 1990See People v. Reynolds, 195 Colo. 386 , 578 P.2d 647 (1978). | 1 | 1 |
People v. Marquezgreen1 sentence1987Nothing in the record reflects that Everett learned of his wife’s age through a spousal communication, and the trial court was correct in concluding that the communication was not privileged under section 13-90-107. 3 See People v. Marquez, 692 P.2d 1089, 1095 (Colo.1984) (“the burden of establishing the applicability of the privilege rests upon the claimant of that privilege”); Clark v. District Court, 668 P.2d 3, 8 (Colo.1983) (same). | 1 | 1 |
Gerick v. Brockgreen2 sentences1983See, e.g., Gerick v. Brock, 120 Colo. 394 , 210 P.2d 214 (1949); Hanlon v. Woodhouse, 113 Colo. 504 , 160 P.2d 998 (1945). 1983See, e.g., Gerick v. Brock, 120 Colo. 394 , 210 P.2d 214 (1949); Hanlon v. Woodhouse, 113 Colo. 504 , 160 P.2d 998 (1945). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Colorado. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Estate of Hamilton v. Egan
green
2 sentences1989In re Estate of Hamilton, 633 P.2d 1100 (Colo.App.1981) is likewise inapposite. 1989In re Estate of Hamilton, 633 P.2d 1100 (Colo.App.1981) is likewise inapposite. | 2 | 1989–1989 |
Colorado Department of Transportation v. Brown Group Retail, Inc.
green
1 sentence2020As we have more recently made clear, “[t]he nature of the injury alleged—not the relief requested—is the primary inquiry to determine whether the CGIA applies to [a] claim.” Open Door Ministries v. Lipschuetz, 2016 CO 37M , ¶ 16, 373 P.3d 575, 579 (emphasis added). 9 To determine whether a claim “could lie in tort” for purposes of the CGIA, we should look to whether the claimant is asserting injuries arising out of a “breach of a general duty of care,” Brown, 182 P.3d at 691 , “regardless of whether that may be . . . the form of relief” provided by the cause of action in question or sought by | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Open Door Ministries v. Lipschuetz
neutral
1 sentence2020As we have more recently made clear, “[t]he nature of the injury alleged—not the relief requested—is the primary inquiry to determine whether the CGIA applies to [a] claim.” Open Door Ministries v. Lipschuetz, 2016 CO 37M , ¶ 16, 373 P.3d 575, 579 (emphasis added). 9 To determine whether a claim “could lie in tort” for purposes of the CGIA, we should look to whether the claimant is asserting injuries arising out of a “breach of a general duty of care,” Brown, 182 P.3d at 691 , “regardless of whether that may be . . . the form of relief” provided by the cause of action in question or sought by | 1 | 2020–2020 |
People v. DISTRICT COURT FOR DENVER
green
1 sentence2006Court, 743 P2d 432 , 435 (Colo.1987) ("Initially, we note that statutory privileges must be strictly construed and the claimant of a privilege bears the burden of establishing the applicability of the privilege."). | 1 | 2006–2006 |
B.B. v. People
green
2 sentences1993She acknowledges that the burden of establishing the applicability of the attorney-client privilege rests with the claimant of the privilege, Clark v. District Court, 668 P.2d 3, 8 (Colo.1983), but asserts that this burden was met by her reliance on B.B. v. People, 785 P.2d 132 (Colo.1990). 1993She acknowledges that the burden of establishing the applicability of the attorney-client privilege rests with the claimant of the privilege, Clark v. District Court, 668 P.2d 3, 8 (Colo.1983), but asserts that this burden was met by her reliance on B.B. v. People, 785 P.2d 132 (Colo.1990). | 1 | 1993–1993 |
McKune v. Industrial Commission
neutral
2 sentences1986Further, in McKune v. Industrial Commission, 94 Colo. 523 , 31 P.2d 322 (1934), our supreme court determined that a penalty assessed against a claimant for violation of a safety rule should be computed after the increased compensation rate for failure to carry insurance was taken into account. 1986Further, in McKune v. Industrial Commission, 94 Colo. 523 , 31 P.2d 322 (1934), our supreme court determined that a penalty assessed against a claimant for violation of a safety rule should be computed after the increased compensation rate for failure to carry insurance was taken into account. | 1 | 1986–1986 |
Community Hospital Ass'n v. DIST. CT., ETC.
green
2 sentences1986At the outset, we note that statutory privileges are strictly construed, see Community Hospital Association v. District Court, 194 Colo. 98 , 570 P.2d 243 (1977), and the claimant of a privilege bears the burden of establishing the applicability of the privilege, Williams v. People, 687 P.2d 950 (Colo.1984). 1986At the outset, we note that statutory privileges are strictly construed, see Community Hospital Association v. District Court, 194 Colo. 98 , 570 P.2d 243 (1977), and the claimant of a privilege bears the burden of establishing the applicability of the privilege, Williams v. People, 687 P.2d 950 (Colo.1984). | 1 | 1986–1986 |
Hanlon v. Woodhouse
green
2 sentences1983See, e.g., Gerick v. Brock, 120 Colo. 394 , 210 P.2d 214 (1949); Hanlon v. Woodhouse, 113 Colo. 504 , 160 P.2d 998 (1945). 1983See, e.g., Gerick v. Brock, 120 Colo. 394 , 210 P.2d 214 (1949); Hanlon v. Woodhouse, 113 Colo. 504 , 160 P.2d 998 (1945). | 1 | 1983–1983 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.