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 1908–2019 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 |
|---|---|---|
New York Life Insurance v. Pikegreen2 sentences1969See in this connection New York Life Co. v. Pike, 51 Colo. 238 , 117 P.899. 1969See in this connection New York Life Co. v. Pike, 51 Colo. 238 , 117 P.899. | 2 | 2 |
Williamson v. Downsgreen2 sentences2010CJ Williom-son v. Downs, 829 P.2d 498, 500 (Colo.App. 1992) (nonparties need not be joined because they were not claiming interest in the property). 2010Cf. Williamson v. Downs, 829 P.2d 498, 500 (Colo.App. 1992) (nonparties need not be joined because they were not claiming interest in the property). | 1 | 1 |
Doe v. State of Neb.green1 sentence2002Russ & Thomas F. Segalla, Couch on Insurance 3d § 203:7 (1995); John Doe v. *1190 Nebraska, 971 F.Supp. 1305, 1306 (D.Neb.1997) (Lolding that full settlement authority requires a representative for a company with a defense or indemnity obligation to have final settlement authority to commit the company, at his or her discretion, to settle, authorize dismissal of a case with prefudiee, or accept a settlement amount). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Colorado. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Board of Water Commissioners v. Industrial Claim Appeals Office
green
1 sentence2019Bd. of Water Comm’rs, 881 P.2d at 477-78 . | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Texas Employment Commission v. Ryan
green
1 sentence2009Id. (emphasis added). | 1 | 2009–2009 |
City & County of Denver v. Industrial Commission
green
1 sentence1983In Altman, this court held that: “Where an employee acts to defend himself against an unprovoked assault by a co-employee, he may not be deemed, for unemployment compensation purposes, to have violated a company rule which prohibits fighting or disturbances on the employer’s premises.” See Denver v. Industrial Commission, 666 P.2d 160 (Colo.App.1983) (volitional act by employee necessary for him to be found at fault for his termination). | 1 | 1983–1983 |
Casias v. Industrial Commission
green
2 sentences1983When an employee is discharged for violating a company rule, benefits may not be reduced under § 8-73-108(9)(a)(VII), unless the violation could have resulted in “serious damage” to the employer’s interests or endangered the “life of the worker or other employee.” Cf. Casias v. Industrial Commission, 38 Colo.App. 261 , 554 P.2d 1357 (1976). 1983When an employee is discharged for violating a company rule, benefits may not be reduced under § 8-73-108(9)(a)(VII), unless the violation could have resulted in “serious damage” to the employer’s interests or endangered the “life of the worker or other employee.” Cf. Casias v. Industrial Commission, 38 Colo.App. 261 , 554 P.2d 1357 (1976). | 1 | 1983–1983 |
Puncec v. City and County of Denver
green
2 sentences1971Puncec v. City and County of Denver, 28 Colo.App. 542 , 475 P.2d 359 . 1971Puncec v. City and County of Denver, 28 Colo.App. 542 , 475 P.2d 359 . | 1 | 1971–1971 |
California Ins. v. Gracey
neutral
1 sentence1908Co. v. Gracey, supra, in order to afford it an opportunity to investigate the causes of loss and verify the proofs thereof, and also to give it an opportunity for making financial 'arrangements to discharge its obligation; but where, as in this instance, it repudiates all liability to the insured upon its policy, he may bring action at once upon being notified by the company that his claim will not be paid. | 1 | 1908–1908 |
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.