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.
8 Colorado opinions name it 2 courts 1908–2017 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 |
|---|---|---|
Siler v. Investment Securities Co.green2 sentences2017See Parkison , 667 P.2d at 782 (holding that the treasurer failed to conduct a diligent inquiry where re-examination of the deeds for the subject property would have revealed a correct address); Siler , 125 Colo. at 441 , 244 P.2d at 879 (finding no diligent inquiry where the "assessment roll and tax warrant" for the subject property contained a correct address to notify the taxpayer). 2017See Parkison , 667 P.2d at 782 (holding that the treasurer failed to conduct a diligent inquiry where re-examination of the deeds for the subject property would have revealed a correct address); Siler , 125 Colo. at 441 , 244 P.2d at 879 (finding no diligent inquiry where the "assessment roll and tax warrant" for the subject property contained a correct address to notify the taxpayer). | 5 | 6 |
Columbus Investment v. Lewisgreen2 sentences2016See Columbus Invs, v. Lewis, 48 P.3d 1222 , 1224 n. 3 (Colo.2002) (noting that although the taxpayers asserted that. they had not received actual notice of the pending issuance of a tax deed, the treasurer had met the section 89-11-128 diligent 1nqu11y requirements). 1122 Recognizing the above—descmbed balance between the need to give notice to a taxpayer and the prietical limitations on what a treasurer can reasonably do to ensure proper notice, cases from this court and. divisions of the court of appeals have required a treasurer to undertake a diligent inquiry after an initial notice has be 2016See Columbus Invs. v. Lewis, 48 P.3d 1222 , 1224 n.3 (Colo. 2002) (noting that although the taxpayers asserted that they had not received actual notice of the pending issuance of a tax deed, the treasurer had met the section 39-11-128 diligent inquiry requirements). ¶22 Recognizing the above-described balance between the need to give notice to a taxpayer and the practical limitations on what a treasurer can reasonably do to ensure proper notice, cases from this court and divisions of the court of appeals have required a treasurer to undertake a diligent inquiry after an initial notice has been | 3 | 3 |
Parkison v. Burleygreen2 sentences2017See Parkison , 667 P.2d at 782 (holding that the treasurer failed to conduct a diligent inquiry where re-examination of the deeds for the subject property would have revealed a correct address); Siler , 125 Colo. at 441 , 244 P.2d at 879 (finding no diligent inquiry where the "assessment roll and tax warrant" for the subject property contained a correct address to notify the taxpayer). 2016In these cireumstances, a division of the court of appeals concluded that the treasurer had failed to conduct a diligent inquiry to find the taxpayers' addresses, Id. 125 And in Schmidt, 874 P.2d at 449 , a notice of a tax sale and an application for a treasurer's deed was returned to the treasurer marked, "Return to Sender, Forwarding Order Expired," In this cireumstance, the division observed that diligent inquiry "requires that if a notice has been returned, the county treasurer must re-examine the county records to check the address for accuracy and look for an alternative address." Id. at | 2 | 5 |
Schmidt v. Langelgreen2 sentences2016In these cireumstances, a division of the court of appeals concluded that the treasurer had failed to conduct a diligent inquiry to find the taxpayers' addresses, Id. 125 And in Schmidt, 874 P.2d at 449 , a notice of a tax sale and an application for a treasurer's deed was returned to the treasurer marked, "Return to Sender, Forwarding Order Expired," In this cireumstance, the division observed that diligent inquiry "requires that if a notice has been returned, the county treasurer must re-examine the county records to check the address for accuracy and look for an alternative address." Id. at 2016In these cireumstances, a division of the court of appeals concluded that the treasurer had failed to conduct a diligent inquiry to find the taxpayers' addresses, Id. 125 And in Schmidt, 874 P.2d at 449 , a notice of a tax sale and an application for a treasurer's deed was returned to the treasurer marked, "Return to Sender, Forwarding Order Expired," In this cireumstance, the division observed that diligent inquiry "requires that if a notice has been returned, the county treasurer must re-examine the county records to check the address for accuracy and look for an alternative address." Id. at | 2 | 4 |
Bald Eagle Mining and Refining Company v. Bruntongreen2 sentences2014Co. v. Brunton, 165 Colo. 28 , 30-32, 437 P.2d 59 , 60-61 (1968) (treasurer had not conducted diligent inquiry in attempting to ascertain landowner's residence when, after receiving return receipt indicating that the person who signed for the mailing was not the intended recipient, the treasurer had not "sought and obtained verification from other sources"); Parkison, 667 P.2d at 781-82 (treasurer failed to conduct a diligent inquiry in attempting to determine landowners' residence when the mailed notices were returned to the treasurer as undeliverable, and the treasurer made no further attemp 2014Co. v. Brunton, 165 Colo. 28 , 30-32, 437 P.2d 59 , 60-61 (1968) (treasurer had not conducted diligent inquiry in attempting to ascertain landowner's residence when, after receiving return receipt indicating that the person who signed for the mailing was not the intended recipient, the treasurer had not "sought and obtained verification from other sources"); Parkison, 667 P.2d at 781-82 (treasurer failed to conduct a diligent inquiry in attempting to determine landowners' residence when the mailed notices were returned to the treasurer as undeliverable, and the treasurer made no further attemp | 2 | 3 |
Lake Canal Reservoir Co. v. Beethegreen1 sentence2017See Lake Canal Reservoir Co. v. Beethe , 227 P.3d 882 , 890 (Colo. 2010) ; Sandstrom v. Solen , 2016 COA 29 , ¶¶ 24, 25, 370 P.3d 669 . ¶ 18 We conclude that the questions to be answered in this case are primarily questions of law, which we review de novo. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Colorado. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Sandstrom v. Solen
green
1 sentence2017See Lake Canal Reservoir Co. v. Beethe , 227 P.3d 882 , 890 (Colo. 2010) ; Sandstrom v. Solen , 2016 COA 29 , ¶¶ 24, 25, 370 P.3d 669 . ¶ 18 We conclude that the questions to be answered in this case are primarily questions of law, which we review de novo. | 1 | 2017–2017 |
Sandstrom v. Solen
green
1 sentence2017See Lake Canal Reservoir Co. v. Beethe , 227 P.3d 882 , 890 (Colo. 2010) ; Sandstrom v. Solen , 2016 COA 29 , ¶¶ 24, 25, 370 P.3d 669 . ¶ 18 We conclude that the questions to be answered in this case are primarily questions of law, which we review de novo. | 1 | 2017–2017 |
Patterson v. Cronin
green
1 sentence1993Dodge v. Meyer, 793 P.2d 639 (Colo.App.1990) (Secretary of State need not demonstrate that notary public received actual notice of commission revocation hearing if statutory requirements for notice by mail have been fulfilled); Patterson v. Cronin, 650 P.2d 531 (Colo.1982) (Affixing summons and complaint to illegally parked vehicles is a method reasonably calculated to provide notice of the violation); see also Olson v. Tax Service Corp., supra (Diligent inquiry for purposes of notice of a tax sale does not require the same level of effort as would ferreting out lost heirs or tracing abscondin | 1 | 1993–1993 |
Dodge v. Meyer
green
1 sentence1993Dodge v. Meyer, 793 P.2d 639 (Colo.App.1990) (Secretary of State need not demonstrate that notary public received actual notice of commission revocation hearing if statutory requirements for notice by mail have been fulfilled); Patterson v. Cronin, 650 P.2d 531 (Colo.1982) (Affixing summons and complaint to illegally parked vehicles is a method reasonably calculated to provide notice of the violation); see also Olson v. Tax Service Corp., supra (Diligent inquiry for purposes of notice of a tax sale does not require the same level of effort as would ferreting out lost heirs or tracing abscondin | 1 | 1993–1993 |
Harding v. Industrial Commission
green
2 sentences1983In attempting to determine if the treasurer acted with diligence, we have applied the rule that words in a statute are to be given their “familiar and generally accepted meaning.” Harding v. Industrial Commission, 183 Colo. 52 , 515 P.2d 95 (1973). 1983In attempting to determine if the treasurer acted with diligence, we have applied the rule that words in a statute are to be given their “familiar and generally accepted meaning.” Harding v. Industrial Commission, 183 Colo. 52 , 515 P.2d 95 (1973). | 1 | 1983–1983 |
Wilcoxen v. Morgan
neutral
1 sentence1908One who, with notice of a prior fraud, purchases of the grantee in the fraudulent conveyance, takes the title subject to all of the infirmities with which it was affected in the hands of his grantor. —Wilcoxen v. Morgan, 2 Colo. 473 . | 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.