holding rule (Colorado) · Go Syfert
← Colorado issues

holding rule in Colorado

13 Colorado opinions name it 2 courts 1888–2025 1 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.

Followed or applied (4)

CaseFollowedCited
People v. Antonio-Antimogreen
colo · 2000 · cited in 1 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2025–2025
1 sentence

2025Cf. People v. Antonio-Antimo, 29 P.3d 298, 303 (Colo. 2000)(“Although a court will give credence to the plain language of the plea [disposition], it will not construe the language so literally that the purpose of the plea [disposition] is frustrated.”). ¶ 17 In other words, the untimeliness of the prosecution’s filing of the restitution requests did not prevent (1) defendant from filing a written objection to the amounts; (2) the court from holding a hearing on the written objection; and (3) the court from addressing the issue of restitution within the timeframe set by section 18-1.3- 603. ¶ 1

11
Johnson v. Trujillogreen
colo · 1999 · cited in 1 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2011–2011
1 sentence

2011It is the "very nature of evidentiary witness privileges to sacrifice some availability of evidence relevant to an administration of justice." Johnson v. Trujillo, 977 P.2d 152, 157 (Colo.1999) (internal quotation omitted).

11
Protestant Episcopal Church v. Barkergreen
calctapp · 1981 · cited in 1 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 1986–1986
2 sentences

1986We recognize that a similar "dissolution” provision was in the Canons of the Diocese of Los Angeles at the time of the dispute in Barker , and that the three parishes (other than Holy Apostles Church) had provisions in their articles of incorporation acceding to the diocesan canons, 171 Cal.Rptr. at 544-46 , yet the California Court of Appeals held that these provisions did not preclude these three parishes from disaffiliating and withdrawing their property from PECUSA, id. at 554-55.

1986We recognize that a similar "dissolution” provision was in the Canons of the Diocese of Los Angeles at the time of the dispute in Barker , and that the three parishes (other than Holy Apostles Church) had provisions in their articles of incorporation acceding to the diocesan canons, 171 Cal.Rptr. at 544-46 , yet the California Court of Appeals held that these provisions did not preclude these three parishes from disaffiliating and withdrawing their property from PECUSA, id. at 554-55.

11
Corbett v. Enogreen
nysupct · 1861 · cited in 1 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 1890–1890
1 sentence

1890See Corbett v. Eno, 13 Abb.

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Colorado. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (10)

CaseCitedYears
Steelsmith v. Gartlan green
wva · 1898
2 sentences

1903In Steelsmith v. Gartlan et al., 45 W.

1903In Steelsmith v. Gartlan et al., 45 W.

21903–1903
People v. Laurson green
coloctapp · 2002
2 sentences

2015But we cannot square that proposition with the holding and analysis in Banks and, therefore, we respectfully decline to follow Laurson. . ., 147 In Lowrson, the defendant filed a postconviction motion' challenging his extraordinary risk sentencing for a conviction of solicitation to commit second degree murder, He contended that because solicitation to commit second degree murder is not listed in the crime of violence statute, it cannot qualify as an extraordinary risk crime. 70 P.3d at 566-67 . 48 The Lowrson division first noted that criminal solicitation is treated as criminal attempt for s

2015Id. at 566 .

12015–2015
Leiting v. Mutha green
coloctapp · 2002
1 sentence

2002We are persuaded by the holding and analysis of CRE 803(8) in Leiting v. Mutha, — P.3d -, 2002 WL 287528 (Colo.App.

12002–2002
People v. Garcia green
colo · 1992
1 sentence

1996Other precedent also demonstrates, as defendant contends, that the trial judge erred in absenting himself from the courtroom while the tape was being played, see People v. Garcia, 826 P.2d 1259 (Colo.1992), and in making the tape available for viewing during jury deliberations.

11996–1996
Jones v. Cox green
colo · 1992
2 sentences

1994Id. at 223 .

1994Id. at 223 .

11994–1994
Estate of Randall v. Colorado State Hospital green
colo · 1968
2 sentences

1979This section and section 153-7-2 shall not affect the lien upon the encumbered property of any claim secured by valid recorded mortgage or deed of trust or by valid pledge accompanied by delivery of possession.” The court of appeals held that the plaintiffs, as minors, were not bound by the one-year limitation established by C.R.S. 1963, 153-7-2 and 3 because of the operation of the disability provisions of C.R.S. 1963, 87-2-3. 3 Defendant argues that this holding was error, and he characterizes the foregoing statutes as nonclaim statutes, which cannot be tolled by a statutorily recognized dis

1979This section and section 153-7-2 shall not affect the lien upon the encumbered property of any claim secured by valid recorded mortgage or deed of trust or by valid pledge accompanied by delivery of possession.” The court of appeals held that the plaintiffs, as minors, were not bound by the one-year limitation established by C.R.S. 1963, 153-7-2 and 3 because of the operation of the disability provisions of C.R.S. 1963, 87-2-3. 3 Defendant argues that this holding was error, and he characterizes the foregoing statutes as nonclaim statutes, which cannot be tolled by a statutorily recognized dis

11979–1979
Anderson v. Lindgren green
colo · 1945
2 sentences

1954The basis for this holding was the rule applied in Anderson v. Lindgren, Adm’r, 113 Colo. 401 , 157 P. (2d) 687 ; and Hilliard, Adm’r v. Shellabarger, 120 Colo. 441 , 210 P. (2d) 441 .

1954The basis for this holding was the rule applied in Anderson v. Lindgren, Adm’r, 113 Colo. 401 , 157 P. (2d) 687 ; and Hilliard, Adm’r v. Shellabarger, 120 Colo. 441 , 210 P. (2d) 441 .

11954–1954
Hilliard v. Shellabarger green
colo · 1949
2 sentences

1954The basis for this holding was the rule applied in Anderson v. Lindgren, Adm’r, 113 Colo. 401 , 157 P. (2d) 687 ; and Hilliard, Adm’r v. Shellabarger, 120 Colo. 441 , 210 P. (2d) 441 .

1954The basis for this holding was the rule applied in Anderson v. Lindgren, Adm’r, 113 Colo. 401 , 157 P. (2d) 687 ; and Hilliard, Adm’r v. Shellabarger, 120 Colo. 441 , 210 P. (2d) 441 .

11954–1954
The People v. . McCumber green
ny · 1858
1 sentence

1890In People v. McCumber, 18 N. Y. 315 , a defense consisting of denials of knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to several matters, and a qualified denial in direct terms of another allegation of the complaint, was stricken out as sham, the court holding that a defense otherwise good may, if false, be stricken out as sham, although duly verified, and this may now be considered as the general practice in New York.

11890–1890
Barker v. Hawley neutral
· 1878
1 sentence

1888Barker v. Hawley, 4 Colo. 316.

11888–1888

Where else courts name it

TX 73 (1895–2023) NY 71 (1889–2024) CA 62 (1893–2026) PA 44 (1906–2024) WV 42 (1895–2026) IL 39 (1920–2023) FL 34 (1928–2016) OH 33 (1937–2024) MD 30 (1928–2024) WA 25 (1927–2025) MI 25 (1961–2025) AL 22 (1849–2025) MO 20 (1883–2019) GA 20 (1953–2020) LA 18 (1961–2024) IN 18 (1923–2019) TN 17 (1956–2023) OR 15 (1903–2022) MS 15 (1987–2020) WI 14 (1938–2016) VA 14 (1874–2022) CO 13 (1888–2025) NJ 13 (1944–2015) KY 12 (1917–2017) MA 11 (1939–2020) CT 11 (1942–2021) MN 10 (1885–2001) OK 9 (1911–2023) AR 9 (1969–2002) KS 8 (1913–2024) RI 8 (1967–2016) ID 8 (1980–2025) IA 7 (1939–2010) AZ 7 (1956–2000) NC 7 (1916–2010) DE 7 (1923–2022) HI 7 (1904–2015) NE 6 (1908–1998) DC 6 (1975–2016) SC 5 (1912–1989) MT 5 (1923–2007) UT 5 (1981–2017) AK 4 (1986–1994) WY 3 (1933–2018) VT 3 (2014–2025) PR 3 (1951–1967) NV 3 (1980–2012) SD 2 (1949–2003) ND 2 (1910–2002) NH 2 (2003–2007)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check