Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
10 Colorado opinions name it 2 courts 1971–2012 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 |
|---|---|---|
Mitchell v. Forsythgreen2 sentences2012See Krystkowiak, 90 P.3d at 863 ; see also Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511, 526 , 105 S.Ct, 2806 , 86 L.Ed.2d 411 (1985) ("Unless the plaintiff's allegations state a. claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the commencement of discovery."). 124 In the qualified immunity context, even if the plaintiff's complaint alleges the commission of acts that violated clearly established law, the defendant is entitled to summary judgment if discovery fails to uncover evidence sufficient to create a genuine issue as to whether 2012See Krystkowiak, 90 P.3d at 863 ; see also Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511, 526 , 105 S.Ct, 2806 , 86 L.Ed.2d 411 (1985) ("Unless the plaintiff's allegations state a. claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the commencement of discovery."). 124 In the qualified immunity context, even if the plaintiff's complaint alleges the commission of acts that violated clearly established law, the defendant is entitled to summary judgment if discovery fails to uncover evidence sufficient to create a genuine issue as to whether | 1 | 2 |
Hecla Mining Co. v. New Hampshire Insurance Co.green2 sentences1999“The actual liability of the insured to the claimant is not the criterion which places upon the insurance company the obligation to defend.” Rather, the obligation to defend arises from allegations in the complaint, which if sustained, would impose a liability covered by the policy. “[W]here the insurer’s duty to defend is not apparent from the pleadings in the case against the in *614 sured, but the allegations do state a claim which is potentially or arguably within the policy coverage, or there is some doubt as to whether a theory of recovery within the policy coverage has been pleaded, the 1992Hecla Mining Co. v. New Hampshire Insurance Co., 811 P.2d 1083 (Colo.1991); see American Motorists Insurance Co. v. General Host Corp., 946 F.2d 1489 (10th Cir.1991). | 1 | 2 |
Krystkowiak v. W.O. Brisben Companies, Inc.green1 sentence2012See Krystkowiak, 90 P.3d at 863 ; see also Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511, 526 , 105 S.Ct, 2806 , 86 L.Ed.2d 411 (1985) ("Unless the plaintiff's allegations state a. claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the commencement of discovery."). 124 In the qualified immunity context, even if the plaintiff's complaint alleges the commission of acts that violated clearly established law, the defendant is entitled to summary judgment if discovery fails to uncover evidence sufficient to create a genuine issue as to whether | 1 | 1 |
Hunter v. Bryantgreen2 sentences2012Hunter v. Bryant, 502 U.S. 224, 228 , 112 S.Ct. 584 , 116 L.Ed.2d 589 (1991) ("Immunity ordinarily should be decided by the court long before trial."); Air Wisconsin Airlines Corp. v. Hoeper, 2012 CO 19, ¶ 21 , 320 P.3d 830 ; Conde v. Colorado State Dep't of Personnel, 872 P.2d 1381, 1388 (Colo.App.1994)("[Blecause qualified immunity means immunity from suit as well as from liability, the issue should be decided as early as possible in the litigation process."); see Freedom from Religion Foundation, Inc. v. Romer, 921 P.2d 84, 91 (Colo.App.1996) (affirming trial court's dismissal of claims bas 2012Hunter v. Bryant, 502 U.S. 224, 228 , 112 S.Ct. 584 , 116 L.Ed.2d 589 (1991) ("Immunity ordinarily should be decided by the court long before trial."); Air Wisconsin Airlines Corp. v. Hoeper, 2012 CO 19, ¶ 21 , 320 P.3d 830 ; Conde v. Colorado State Dep't of Personnel, 872 P.2d 1381, 1388 (Colo.App.1994)("[Blecause qualified immunity means immunity from suit as well as from liability, the issue should be decided as early as possible in the litigation process."); see Freedom from Religion Foundation, Inc. v. Romer, 921 P.2d 84, 91 (Colo.App.1996) (affirming trial court's dismissal of claims bas | 1 | 1 |
Conde v. Colorado State Department of Personnelgreen2 sentences2012Hunter v. Bryant, 502 U.S. 224, 228 , 112 S.Ct. 584 , 116 L.Ed.2d 589 (1991) ("Immunity ordinarily should be decided by the court long before trial."); Air Wisconsin Airlines Corp. v. Hoeper, 2012 CO 19, ¶ 21 , 320 P.3d 830 ; Conde v. Colorado State Dep't of Personnel, 872 P.2d 1381, 1388 (Colo.App.1994)("[Blecause qualified immunity means immunity from suit as well as from liability, the issue should be decided as early as possible in the litigation process."); see Freedom from Religion Foundation, Inc. v. Romer, 921 P.2d 84, 91 (Colo.App.1996) (affirming trial court's dismissal of claims bas 2012Hunter v. Bryant, 502 U.S. 224, 228 , 112 S.Ct. 584 , 116 L.Ed.2d 589 (1991) ("Immunity ordinarily should be decided by the court long before trial."); Air Wisconsin Airlines Corp. v. Hoeper, 2012 CO 19, ¶ 21 , 320 P.3d 830 ; Conde v. Colorado State Dep't of Personnel, 872 P.2d 1381, 1388 (Colo.App.1994)("[Blecause qualified immunity means immunity from suit as well as from liability, the issue should be decided as early as possible in the litigation process."); see Freedom from Religion Foundation, Inc. v. Romer, 921 P.2d 84, 91 (Colo.App.1996) (affirming trial court's dismissal of claims bas | 1 | 1 |
Struminikovski v. United Statesgreen1 sentence2012Hunter v. Bryant, 502 U.S. 224, 228 , 112 S.Ct. 584 , 116 L.Ed.2d 589 (1991) ("Immunity ordinarily should be decided by the court long before trial."); Air Wisconsin Airlines Corp. v. Hoeper, 2012 CO 19, ¶ 21 , 320 P.3d 830 ; Conde v. Colorado State Dep't of Personnel, 872 P.2d 1381, 1388 (Colo.App.1994)("[Blecause qualified immunity means immunity from suit as well as from liability, the issue should be decided as early as possible in the litigation process."); see Freedom from Religion Foundation, Inc. v. Romer, 921 P.2d 84, 91 (Colo.App.1996) (affirming trial court's dismissal of claims bas | 1 | 1 |
FREEDOM FROM RELIGION FOUN. v. Romergreen1 sentence2012Hunter v. Bryant, 502 U.S. 224, 228 , 112 S.Ct. 584 , 116 L.Ed.2d 589 (1991) ("Immunity ordinarily should be decided by the court long before trial."); Air Wisconsin Airlines Corp. v. Hoeper, 2012 CO 19, ¶ 21 , 320 P.3d 830 ; Conde v. Colorado State Dep't of Personnel, 872 P.2d 1381, 1388 (Colo.App.1994)("[Blecause qualified immunity means immunity from suit as well as from liability, the issue should be decided as early as possible in the litigation process."); see Freedom from Religion Foundation, Inc. v. Romer, 921 P.2d 84, 91 (Colo.App.1996) (affirming trial court's dismissal of claims bas | 1 | 1 |
Key v. Peoplegreen1 sentence1999See Key, 865 P.2d at 827 ; see also Rodriguez, 914 P.2d at 278. | 1 | 1 |
American Motorists Insurance Company v. General Host Corporation & American Salt Company, Inc.green1 sentence1992Hecla Mining Co. v. New Hampshire Insurance Co., 811 P.2d 1083 (Colo.1991); see American Motorists Insurance Co. v. General Host Corp., 946 F.2d 1489 (10th Cir.1991). | 1 | 1 |
City of Willoughby Hills v. Cincinnati Insurancegreen2 sentences1991Co., 9 Ohio St.3d 177 , 459 N.E.2d 555, 558 (1984). 1991Co., 9 Ohio St.3d 177 , 459 N.E.2d 555, 558 (1984). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Colorado. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Air Wisconsin Airlines Corp. v. Hoeper
green
2 sentences2012Hunter v. Bryant, 502 U.S. 224, 228 , 112 S.Ct. 584 , 116 L.Ed.2d 589 (1991) ("Immunity ordinarily should be decided by the court long before trial."); Air Wisconsin Airlines Corp. v. Hoeper, 2012 CO 19, ¶ 21 , 320 P.3d 830 ; Conde v. Colorado State Dep't of Personnel, 872 P.2d 1381, 1388 (Colo.App.1994)("[Blecause qualified immunity means immunity from suit as well as from liability, the issue should be decided as early as possible in the litigation process."); see Freedom from Religion Foundation, Inc. v. Romer, 921 P.2d 84, 91 (Colo.App.1996) (affirming trial court's dismissal of claims bas 2012Hunter v. Bryant, 502 U.S. 224, 228 , 112 S.Ct. 584 , 116 L.Ed.2d 589 (1991) ("Immunity ordinarily should be decided by the court long before trial."); Air Wisconsin Airlines Corp. v. Hoeper, 2012 CO 19, ¶ 21 , 320 P.3d 830 ; Conde v. Colorado State Dep't of Personnel, 872 P.2d 1381, 1388 (Colo.App.1994)("[Blecause qualified immunity means immunity from suit as well as from liability, the issue should be decided as early as possible in the litigation process."); see Freedom from Religion Foundation, Inc. v. Romer, 921 P.2d 84, 91 (Colo.App.1996) (affirming trial court's dismissal of claims bas | 1 | 2012–2012 |
Nokes v. Aspen Aviation, Inc.
green
1 sentence2010Id. at 251 . | 1 | 2010–2010 |
People v. Williams
green
1 sentence1996People v. Williams, supra. Relying on James v. People, 727 P.2d 850 (Colo.1986), defendant argues that when the prosecution presents a case to a jury on alternative theories under which a defendant can be found guilty of the crime charged, and the jury returns a general verdict of guilty, to withstand a due process challenge the evidence must be sufficient to support a guilty verdict under each and every theory. | 1 | 1996–1996 |
James v. People
green
1 sentence1996People v. Williams, supra. Relying on James v. People, 727 P.2d 850 (Colo.1986), defendant argues that when the prosecution presents a case to a jury on alternative theories under which a defendant can be found guilty of the crime charged, and the jury returns a general verdict of guilty, to withstand a due process challenge the evidence must be sufficient to support a guilty verdict under each and every theory. | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Orville Douglass and Wilma Douglass v. Hartford Insurance Company, a Connecticut Insurance Corporation
green
2 sentences1991"The actual liability of the insured to the claimant is not the criterion which places upon the insurance company the obligation to defend." Rather, the obligation to defend arises from allegations in the complaint, which if sustained, would impose a liability covered by the policy. [8] Id. "[W]here the insurer's duty to defend is not apparent from the pleadings in the case against the insured, but the allegations do state a claim which is potentially or arguably within the policy coverage, or there is some doubt as to whether a theory of recovery within the policy coverage has been pleaded, t 1991“The actual liability of the insured to the claimant is not the criterion which places upon the insurance company the obligation to defend.” Rather, the obligation to defend arises from allegations in the complaint, which if sustained, would impose a liability covered by the policy. 8 Id. “[W]here the insurer’s duty to defend is not apparent from the pleadings in the case against the insured, but the allegations do state a claim which is potentially or arguably within the policy coverage, or there is some doubt as to whether a theory of recovery within the policy coverage has been pleaded, the | 1 | 1991–1991 |
People v. McFarland
neutral
2 sentences1979People v. Musso, 193 Colo. 35 , 561 P.2d 1259 (1977); People v. McFarland, 193 Colo. 1 , 565 P.2d 550 (1977). 1979People v. Musso, 193 Colo. 35 , 561 P.2d 1259 (1977); People v. McFarland, 193 Colo. 1 , 565 P.2d 550 (1977). | 1 | 1979–1979 |
People v. Musso
green
2 sentences1979People v. Musso, 193 Colo. 35 , 561 P.2d 1259 (1977); People v. McFarland, 193 Colo. 1 , 565 P.2d 550 (1977). 1979People v. Musso, 193 Colo. 35 , 561 P.2d 1259 (1977); People v. McFarland, 193 Colo. 1 , 565 P.2d 550 (1977). | 1 | 1979–1979 |
Swanson v. Martin
green
2 sentences1971In Swanson v. Martin, 120 Colo. 361 , 209 P.2d 917 , the Supreme Court stated: "It is of course fundamental that it is the sole province of the jury to determine issues of fact where there exists a conflict with regard thereto. 1971In Swanson v. Martin, 120 Colo. 361 , 209 P.2d 917 , the Supreme Court stated: "It is of course fundamental that it is the sole province of the jury to determine issues of fact where there exists a conflict with regard thereto. | 1 | 1971–1971 |
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.