case is a discretionary rule in Colorado

8 Colorado opinions name it 1 courts 1992–2021 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)

Case	Followed	Cited
Mining Equipment Inc. v. Leadville Corp.green coloctapp · 1993 · cited in 2 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 1997–2020 2 sentences 2020Inc. v. Leadville Corp., 856 P.2d 81, 85 (Colo. App. 1993). 1997Mining Equipment, Inc. v. Leadville Corp., 856 P.2d 81 (Colo.App.1993); see Denver Electric & Neon Service Corp. v. Gerald H.	1	2
Hardesty v. Pinogreen coloctapp · 2009 · cited in 1 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2021–2021 1 sentence 2021DeForrest v. City of Cherry Hills Village, 990 P.2d 1139, 1142 (Colo. App. 1999). “[C]onclusions of an appellate court on issues presented to it as well as rulings logically necessary to sustain such conclusions become the law of the case.” Hardesty v. Pino, 222 P.3d 336, 340 (Colo. App. 2009) (quoting Super Valu Stores, Inc. v. Dist.	1	1
DeForrest v. City of Cherry Hills Villagegreen coloctapp · 1999 · cited in 1 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2021–2021 1 sentence 2021DeForrest v. City of Cherry Hills Village, 990 P.2d 1139, 1142 (Colo. App. 1999). “[C]onclusions of an appellate court on issues presented to it as well as rulings logically necessary to sustain such conclusions become the law of the case.” Hardesty v. Pino, 222 P.3d 336, 340 (Colo. App. 2009) (quoting Super Valu Stores, Inc. v. Dist.	1	1
People v. Jankegreen coloctapp · 1992 · cited in 1 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2014–2014 1 sentence 2014We disagree. $28 "The doctrine of the law of the case is a discretionary rule of practice directing that prior relevant rulings made in the same case generally are to be followed." People v. Janke, 852 P.2d 1271, 1274 (Colo.App.1992).	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

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

Also cited on this issue (4)

Case	Cited	Years
People v. Dunlap green colo · 1999 1 sentence 2000People v. Dunlap, 975 P.2d 723 (Colo.1999)(when applied to a court's power to reconsider its own prior rulings, the law of the case is a discretionary rule of practice).	1	2000–2000
Gavend v. Malman green coloctapp · 1997 2 sentences 1999Gavend v. Malman, 946 P.2d 558 (Colo.App.1997). 1999Gavend v. Malman, 946 P.2d 558 (Colo.App.1997).	1	1999–1999
Moore v. 1600 Downing Street, Ltd. green coloctapp · 1983 1 sentence 1993And, applying Moore v. 1600 Doming Street, Ltd., 668 P.2d 16 (Colo.App.1983), the court reasoned that the rule of the law of the case is a discretionary rule of practice based on the policy that once an issue is decided that should be the end of the matter, but that it was inapplicable here since there was new evidence before the court.	1	1993–1993
Governor's Ranch Professional Center, Ltd. v. Mercy of Colorado, Inc. green coloctapp · 1990 1 sentence 1992Governor’s Ranch Professional Center, Ltd. v. Mercy, Inc., 793 P.2d 648 (Colo.App.1990).	1	1992–1992

Where else courts name it

CO 8 (1992–2021) LA 4 (2010–2013) WA 3 (2012–2023) IL 2 (2006–2006) RI 2 (2011–2012)

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