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 1915–2025 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.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
People v. Laursongreen1 sentence2017See People v. Laurson, 70 P.3d 564, 566 (Colo. App. 36 2002) (“When a defendant indicates at the providency hearing that he or she understood the matters contained in a written guilty plea advisement form, the burden of proof is on the defendant to show that the apparent waiver was not effective.”). ¶ 58 There are further reasons for concluding that defendant has not shown prejudice. | 1 | 1 |
U. S. Ex Rel. Sheldon Electric Co. v. Blackhawk Heating & Plumbing Co.green1 sentence1985See United States v. Blackhawk Heating and Plumbing Co., Inc., 423 F.Supp. 486 (S.D.N.Y.1976); Greenebaum-Mountain Mortgage Company v. Pioneer National Title Insurance Co., 421 F.Supp, 1348 (D.Colo.1976). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Colorado. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Yates v. Hurd
green
2 sentences1998Yates v. Hurd, 8 Colo. 343 , 8 P. 675 (1885). 1915The general rule as to the character of possession sufficient, in such case, to put an interested person on his inquiry, was announced by this court in Yates v. Hurd, 8 Colo. 343 , 8 Pac. 575 , to be, “ ‘that open, notorious and exclusive possession of real estate, under an apparent claim of ownership, is notice to those who subsequently deal with the title of whatever interest the one in possession has in the fee, whether such interest be legal or equitable in its nature.’ Wade, Notice, Sec. 273, and cases cited. | 2 | 1915–1998 |
Upper Eagle Regional Water Authority v. Simpson
green
1 sentence2025Here, the water court's apparent requirement of near-certainty was contrary to the requirement of an integrated inquiry into injury and instead echoed the kind of determination of the time, amount, and location of depletions for its own sake that we rejected in Upper Eagle , 167 P.3d at 735 . ¶107 I am not persuaded otherwise by the water court's view that, on the facts of this case, it needed to know the "exact locations" of the proposed wells in order to reach the question of injury. ¶108 Another of Firestone's experts, Andrew Case, testified that a well located 250 feet from the St. | 1 | 2025–2025 |
People v. Chavez
green
1 sentence2002See Craig v. People, supro; People v. Chavez, 7 P.3d 1047 (Colo.App.1999). | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Jefferson County School District R-1 v. Justus ex rel. Justus
green
1 sentence2001Relying on the supreme court's decision in Jefferson County School District R-1 v. Justus, 725 P.2d 767 (Colo.1986), the trial court found that there was "an apparent exception to the sovereign immunity doctrine made for claims arising out of the school district's failure to protect children in its custody from the negligence of third parties, or for a school district's failure to perform duties of care voluntarily assumed by it." According ly, the court found that there was no jurisdictional bar as to plaintiff's claims against the school district. | 1 | 2001–2001 |
People v. Curtis
green
2 sentences1985People v. Curtis, 681 P.2d 504 (Colo.1984). 1985People v. Curtis, 681 P.2d 504 (Colo.1984). | 1 | 1985–1985 |
Zipperian v. People
neutral
1 sentence1934I cannot allow to go unchallenged the apparent claim that the cases of Zipperian v. People, 33 Colo. 134 , 79 Pac. 1018 , and Brennan v. People, 37 Colo. 256 , 86 Pac. 79 , support the opinion of the court. | 1 | 1934–1934 |
Brennan v. People
neutral
1 sentence1934I cannot allow to go unchallenged the apparent claim that the cases of Zipperian v. People, 33 Colo. 134 , 79 Pac. 1018 , and Brennan v. People, 37 Colo. 256 , 86 Pac. 79 , support the opinion of the court. | 1 | 1934–1934 |
Dunlop v. Mercer
green
2 sentences1921Dunlop v. Mercer, 156 Fed. 545 , 86 C. 1921Dunlop v. Mercer, 156 Fed. 545 , 86 C. | 1 | 1921–1921 |
Corrada v. García
neutral
1 sentence1915The general rule as to the character of possession sufficient, in such case, to put an interested person on his inquiry, was announced by this court in Yates v. Hurd, 8 Colo. 343 , 8 Pac. 575 , to be, “ ‘that open, notorious and exclusive possession of real estate, under an apparent claim of ownership, is notice to those who subsequently deal with the title of whatever interest the one in possession has in the fee, whether such interest be legal or equitable in its nature.’ Wade, Notice, Sec. 273, and cases cited. | 1 | 1915–1915 |
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.