14 Colorado opinions name it 2 courts 1901–2013 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 |
|---|---|---|
Stateline Steel Erectors, Inc. v. Shieldsgreen2 sentences2013Agency, Inc., 912 P.2d 559, 563-66 (Haw.Ct.App.1996) (holding that a party injured in an automobile accident could sue an insurance agent on an insured's assigned claim for negligence in failing to procure appropriate insurance, in exchange for the injured party's covenant not to execute upon a stipulated judgment); Red Giant Oil Co. v. Lawlor, 528 N.W.2d 524, 528-35 (Iowa 1995) (allowing a tort claimant to sue, as the insured's assign-ee, the insurer's agent for failure to procure the correct coverage, in return for the tort claimant's covenant not to execute on a stipulated judgment against 2013Agency, Inc., 912 P.2d 559, 563-66 (Haw.Ct.App.1996) (holding that a party injured in an automobile accident could sue an insurance agent on an insured's assigned claim for negligence in failing to procure appropriate insurance, in exchange for the injured party's covenant not to execute upon a stipulated judgment); Red Giant Oil Co. v. Lawlor, 528 N.W.2d 524, 528-35 (Iowa 1995) (allowing a tort claimant to sue, as the insured's assign-ee, the insurer's agent for failure to procure the correct coverage, in return for the tort claimant's covenant not to execute on a stipulated judgment against | 1 | 1 |
Kobbeman v. Olesongreen1 sentence2013Furman, Inc., 697 So.2d 981, 983-85 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1997); Kobbeman v. Oleson, 574 N.W.2d 633, 635-37 (S.D.1998); Tip's Package Store, Inc. v. Commercial Ins. | 1 | 1 |
Red Giant Oil Co. v. Lawlorgreen1 sentence2013Agency, Inc., 912 P.2d 559, 563-66 (Haw.Ct.App.1996) (holding that a party injured in an automobile accident could sue an insurance agent on an insured's assigned claim for negligence in failing to procure appropriate insurance, in exchange for the injured party's covenant not to execute upon a stipulated judgment); Red Giant Oil Co. v. Lawlor, 528 N.W.2d 524, 528-35 (Iowa 1995) (allowing a tort claimant to sue, as the insured's assign-ee, the insurer's agent for failure to procure the correct coverage, in return for the tort claimant's covenant not to execute on a stipulated judgment against | 1 | 1 |
Lageman v. Frank H. Furman, Inc.green1 sentence2013Furman, Inc., 697 So.2d 981, 983-85 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1997); Kobbeman v. Oleson, 574 N.W.2d 633, 635-37 (S.D.1998); Tip's Package Store, Inc. v. Commercial Ins. | 1 | 1 |
McLellan v. Atchison Insurance Agency, Inc.green1 sentence2013Agency, Inc., 912 P.2d 559, 563-66 (Haw.Ct.App.1996) (holding that a party injured in an automobile accident could sue an insurance agent on an insured's assigned claim for negligence in failing to procure appropriate insurance, in exchange for the injured party's covenant not to execute upon a stipulated judgment); Red Giant Oil Co. v. Lawlor, 528 N.W.2d 524, 528-35 (Iowa 1995) (allowing a tort claimant to sue, as the insured's assign-ee, the insurer's agent for failure to procure the correct coverage, in return for the tort claimant's covenant not to execute on a stipulated judgment against | 1 | 1 |
Roberts v. Holland & Hartgreen1 sentence2010This is contrary to the proposition that "Colorado law generally favors the assignability of rights." Maj. op. at 261 (citing Roberts v. Holland & Hart, 857 P.2d 492, 495 (Colo.App.1993)). | 1 | 1 |
Kruse v. McKennagreen2 sentences2010See, e.g., Kruse v. McKenna, 178 P.3d 1198, 1202 (Colo.2008) (affirming trial court's dismissal with prejudice of assignee's action to recover assigned claim where claim was unassignable as a matter of law). 2010In Kruse, we affirmed the trial court's dismissal with prejudice of an assignee's claim for liquidated damages because we found that the damages constituted a penalty that could not be assigned. 178 P.3d at 1202 (affirming trial court's dismissal with prejudice of assignee's action to recover assigned claim where claim was unassignable as a matter of law). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Colorado. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Henry v. Travelers' Insurance
neutral
2 sentences1963Co., 41 Colo. 253 , 92 Pac. 695 , stated: “But as appellee did not seasonably object to such non-compliance, and. as it is more satisfactory to us to put the decision upon more substantial grounds, we proceed to a discus sion of the assigned error which counsel have argued.” (Emphasis supplied.) To like effect is the case of Henry v. Travelers Insurance Co., 16 Colo. 179 , 26 Pac. 318 , in which this court held that a motion to dismiss a writ of error, on the ground that there had been a noncompliance with the rules of the court respecting briefs, should be filed in apt time in order to have t 1963Co., 41 Colo. 253 , 92 Pac. 695 , stated: “But as appellee did not seasonably object to such non-compliance, and. as it is more satisfactory to us to put the decision upon more substantial grounds, we proceed to a discus sion of the assigned error which counsel have argued.” (Emphasis supplied.) To like effect is the case of Henry v. Travelers Insurance Co., 16 Colo. 179 , 26 Pac. 318 , in which this court held that a motion to dismiss a writ of error, on the ground that there had been a noncompliance with the rules of the court respecting briefs, should be filed in apt time in order to have t | 2 | 1963–1963 |
Lombard v. Overland Ditch & Reservoir Co.
neutral
2 sentences1963Co., 41 Colo. 253 , 92 Pac. 695 , stated: “But as appellee did not seasonably object to such non-compliance, and. as it is more satisfactory to us to put the decision upon more substantial grounds, we proceed to a discus sion of the assigned error which counsel have argued.” (Emphasis supplied.) To like effect is the case of Henry v. Travelers Insurance Co., 16 Colo. 179 , 26 Pac. 318 , in which this court held that a motion to dismiss a writ of error, on the ground that there had been a noncompliance with the rules of the court respecting briefs, should be filed in apt time in order to have t 1963Co., 41 Colo. 253 , 92 Pac. 695 , stated: “But as appellee did not seasonably object to such non-compliance, and. as it is more satisfactory to us to put the decision upon more substantial grounds, we proceed to a discus sion of the assigned error which counsel have argued.” (Emphasis supplied.) To like effect is the case of Henry v. Travelers Insurance Co., 16 Colo. 179 , 26 Pac. 318 , in which this court held that a motion to dismiss a writ of error, on the ground that there had been a noncompliance with the rules of the court respecting briefs, should be filed in apt time in order to have t | 2 | 1963–1963 |
Van Wyk v. People
neutral
2 sentences1938In Kolkman v. People, 89 Colo. 8 , 300 Pac. 575 , we said: “In Van Wyk v. People, 45 Colo. 1 , 99 Pac. 1009 , the defendants were charged with the crime of murder, and the trial court instructed the jury on the law of conspiracy, and this was assigned as error. 1938In Kolkman v. People , 89 Colo. 8 , 300 Pac. 575 , we said: "In Van Wyk v. People , 45 Colo. 1 , 99 Pac. 1009 , the defendants were charged with the crime of murder, and the trial court instructed the jury on the law of conspiracy, and this was assigned as error. | 2 | 1931–1938 |
Currigan v. Stone
green
2 sentences1960In Currigan v. Stone, 136 Colo. 326 , 317 P. (2d) 1044 , it was held that: “ * * * Interest is not recoverable against a municipality on claims arising out of its actions in a governmental capacity. * * Thus it appears that interest is not recoverable on the claims from the date they arose. 1960In Currigan v. Stone, 136 Colo. 326 , 317 P. (2d) 1044 , it was held that: “ * * * Interest is not recoverable against a municipality on claims arising out of its actions in a governmental capacity. * * Thus it appears that interest is not recoverable on the claims from the date they arose. | 1 | 1960–1960 |
Larson v. Long
green
2 sentences1958This tendered instruction was given and approved by this court in Larson v. Long, 74 Colo. 152 , 219 Pac. 1066 , wherein it is said: “While it is true that such presumption is prima facie only, the court did not say to the jury that it was a conclusive presumption, and the plaintiff should have asked for a modification. 1958This tendered instruction was given and approved by this court in Larson v. Long, 74 Colo. 152 , 219 Pac. 1066 , wherein it is said: “While it is true that such presumption is prima facie only, the court did not say to the jury that it was a conclusive presumption, and the plaintiff should have asked for a modification. | 1 | 1958–1958 |
Boyles v. People
neutral
2 sentences1940In support of our rejection of defendants’ contention as to the assigned error predicated upon misconduct of the jury, we cite Boyles v. People, 90 Colo. 32 , 6 P. (2d) 7 , and Ison v. Stewart, 105 Colo. 55 , 94 P. (2d) 70 . 1940In support of our rejection of defendants’ contention as to the assigned error predicated upon misconduct of the jury, we cite Boyles v. People, 90 Colo. 32 , 6 P. (2d) 7 , and Ison v. Stewart, 105 Colo. 55 , 94 P. (2d) 70 . | 1 | 1940–1940 |
Ison v. Stewart
neutral
1 sentence1940In support of our rejection of defendants’ contention as to the assigned error predicated upon misconduct of the jury, we cite Boyles v. People, 90 Colo. 32 , 6 P. (2d) 7 , and Ison v. Stewart, 105 Colo. 55 , 94 P. (2d) 70 . | 1 | 1940–1940 |
Kolkman v. People
green
2 sentences1938In Kolkman v. People, 89 Colo. 8 , 300 Pac. 575 , we said: “In Van Wyk v. People, 45 Colo. 1 , 99 Pac. 1009 , the defendants were charged with the crime of murder, and the trial court instructed the jury on the law of conspiracy, and this was assigned as error. 1938In Kolkman v. People, 89 Colo. 8 , 300 Pac. 575 , we said: “In Van Wyk v. People, 45 Colo. 1 , 99 Pac. 1009 , the defendants were charged with the crime of murder, and the trial court instructed the jury on the law of conspiracy, and this was assigned as error. | 1 | 1938–1938 |
Sweet v. Barnard
green
2 sentences1924Code 1921, § 79; Sweet v. Barnard, 66 Colo. 526 , 182 Pac. 22 ; Fowler v. Fowler, 74 Colo. 231 , 220 Pac. 988 . 1924Code 1921, § 79; Sweet v. Barnard, 66 Colo. 526 , 182 Pac. 22 ; Fowler v. Fowler, 74 Colo. 231 , 220 Pac. 988 . | 1 | 1924–1924 |
Fowler v. Fowler
neutral
2 sentences1924Code 1921, § 79; Sweet v. Barnard, 66 Colo. 526 , 182 Pac. 22 ; Fowler v. Fowler, 74 Colo. 231 , 220 Pac. 988 . 1924Code 1921, § 79; Sweet v. Barnard, 66 Colo. 526 , 182 Pac. 22 ; Fowler v. Fowler, 74 Colo. 231 , 220 Pac. 988 . | 1 | 1924–1924 |
Credit Men's Adjustment Co. v. Vickery
green
1 sentence1920In Credit Men’s Co. v. Vickery, 62 Colo. 214 , that question was decided adversely to said contention. | 1 | 1920–1920 |
Garcia v. People
neutral
1 sentence1919In Drach v. Leckenby, 64 Colo. 172 , 546 Pac. 424 , L. | 1 | 1919–1919 |
People ex rel. Attorney General v. Owers
neutral
1 sentence1906We have heretofore held in quo warranto proceedings that the burden is upon the respondent to prove his right to the office by a preponderance of the testimony. — People v. Owers, 29 Colo. 535 ; People ex rel. v. Stratton, 33 Colo. 464 . | 1 | 1906–1906 |
People ex rel. Saunier v. Stratton
neutral
1 sentence1906We have heretofore held in quo warranto proceedings that the burden is upon the respondent to prove his right to the office by a preponderance of the testimony. — People v. Owers, 29 Colo. 535 ; People ex rel. v. Stratton, 33 Colo. 464 . | 1 | 1906–1906 |
Wyatt v. Larimer & Weld Irrigation Co.
green
1 sentence1901It was decided in Wyatt v. Irrigation Co., 18 Colo. 298 , that, “A perpetual right to have a certain quantity of water flow through an irrigating ditch is an easement in the ditch, an incorporeal hereditament, descendible by inheritance, and a freehold estate.” Upon the trial the appellant objected to the introduction of any testimony by the appellees, on the ground that the complaint did not state a cause of action; the trial court overruled the objection, and this is assigned as error. | 1 | 1901–1901 |
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.