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.
9 Colorado opinions name it 2 courts 2003–2026 3 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 |
|---|---|---|
Potvin v. Lincoln Service & Equipment Co.green2 sentences2016Co. , 6 A.3d 60, 70-71 (Conn. 2010). 2016Co., 298 Conn. 620 , 6 A.3d 60, 70-71 (2010). | 2 | 2 |
Stephens v. Colaianniagreen2 sentences2016It also notes that in Stephens v. Colaiannia , 942 P.2d 1374, 1379 (Colo. App. 1997), the division recognized a form of offset by holding that where claimants had been paid from both an insolvent insured’s receiver and an out-of-state guaranty association, the association had a claim against the receiver. ¶131 CIGA neither disputes this general principle nor cites authority contrary to Stephens . 2016It also notes that in Stephens v. Colaiannia, 942 P.2d 1374, 1379 (Colo.App.1997), the division'recognized a form of offset by holding that where claimants had been paid from both an insolvent insured’s receiver and an out-of-state guaranty association, the association had a claim against the receiver. ¶ 131 CIGA neither disputes this general principle nor cites authority contrary to Stephens . | 2 | 2 |
Jacqueline Gebert v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.green1 sentence2026Gebert v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 2023 COA 107, ¶ 25 (citation omitted). 2. | 1 | 1 |
Armed Forces Bank, N.A. v. Hicksgreen1 sentence2020See Armed Forces Bank, N.A., ¶ 38, 365 P.3d at 386 . 43 VII. | 1 | 1 |
People v. Dashgreen1 sentence2020See id. (explaining we do not consider arguments that have not been raised on appeal). [A]n organization has associational standing when: (1) its members would otherwise have standing to sue in their own right; (2) the interests it seeks to protect are germane to the organization’s purpose; and (3) neither the claim asserted, nor the relief requested, 22 requires the participation of individual members of the lawsuit. | 1 | 1 |
Webb v. City of Black Hawkgreen2 sentences2016See Webb, ¶ 16, 295 P.3d at 486 . ¶48 The question thus becomes whether the Oil and Gas Conservation Act preempts Article XVI because of an operational conflict. ¶49 As an initial matter, we reject the Association’s claim that the Commission has the exclusive authority to regulate the technical aspects of oil and gas operations and that such technical regulation constitutes a de facto operational conflict. 2016See Webb, ¶ 16, 295 P.3d at 486. ¶48 The question thus becomes whether the Oil and Gas Conservation Act preempts Article XVI because of an operational conflict. ¶49 As an initial matter, we reject the Association’s claim that the Commission has the exclusive authority to regulate the technical aspects of oil and gas operations and that such technical regulation constitutes a de facto operational conflict. | 1 | 1 |
Hickman v. Catholic Health Initiativesgreen1 sentence2016See Hickman v. Catholic Health Initiatives , 2013 COA 129, ¶26 . 3 Giving an association immunity from liability that arises from performance of its duties does not mean that the immunity provision "permit[s] [an] association to act improperly in the handling of all claims without any consequences." Potvin v. Lincoln Serv. & Equip. | 1 | 1 |
People v. Herbisongreen1 sentence2003Although a separate instruction specifically outlining the elements of the association claim stated the correct standard, “when various instructions are in direct conflict and *1166 one of the instructions is an incorrect and clearly prejudicial statement of the law, the fact that other instructions contain a correct statement of the law cannot.cure the error.” People v. Herbison, 761 P.2d 263, 264 (Colo.App.1988). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Colorado. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Colorado Department of Transportation v. Brown Group Retail, Inc.
green
1 sentence2026Brown Grp., 182 P.3d at 691 . ¶ 41 Accordingly, we conclude that the Association’s accounting claim is barred under the CGIA. | 1 | 2026–2026 |
Madison Capital Co. v. Star Acquisition VIII
green
1 sentence2025The Pucas’ response opposing the Association’s motion was sufficient to preserve their appellate contentions. 3 Madison Capital Co. v. Star Acquisition VIII, 214 P.3d 557 (Colo. App. 2009), on which the Association relies, doesn’t hold to the contrary. | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Accetta v. Brooks Towers Residences Condo. Ass'n, Inc.
green
1 sentence2021Id. ¶ 42 The district court noted that the Association's motion to dismiss ultimately failed, but it disagreed that the time spent making it should be excluded from a fee application: Litigation is almost always a series of wins and losses, which then flow largely inextricably into a result. | 1 | 2021–2021 |
McAlonan v. U.S. Home Corp.
neutral
1 sentence2004Cf. McAlonan v. U.S. Home Corp., 724 P.2d 78 (Colo.App.1986)(affirming instruction directing jury to measure damages to residential property as the cost of repair plus any diminution in market value as repaired). | 1 | 2004–2004 |
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.