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.
7 Colorado opinions name it 1 courts 1981–2009 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 |
|---|---|---|
BD. OF CTY. COM'RS OF WELD CTY. v. Hawkinsgreen1 sentence2009Bd. of County Comm'rs v. Howkins, 690 P.2d 1299, 1300 (Colo.App.1984); see also § 30-28-124(2), C.R.S.2008. | 1 | 1 |
Board of County Commissioners v. Condergreen1 sentence2006See Bd. of County Comm'rs v. Conder, 927 P.2d 1339, 1353 (Colo.1996)(Kourlis, J., dissenting)(quoting Holly Dev., Inc. v. Bd. of County Comm'rs, 140 Colo. 95, 105 , 342 P.2d 1032, 1038 (1959): "[Olverall plans or changes should be given such publicity as will reasonably inform those owners affected, as well as the public, of what is proposed."). | 1 | 1 |
Holly Development, Inc. v. Board of County Commissionersgreen2 sentences2006See Bd. of County Comm'rs v. Conder, 927 P.2d 1339, 1353 (Colo.1996)(Kourlis, J., dissenting)(quoting Holly Dev., Inc. v. Bd. of County Comm'rs, 140 Colo. 95, 105 , 342 P.2d 1032, 1038 (1959): "[Olverall plans or changes should be given such publicity as will reasonably inform those owners affected, as well as the public, of what is proposed."). 2006See Bd. of County Comm'rs v. Conder, 927 P.2d 1339, 1353 (Colo.1996)(Kourlis, J., dissenting)(quoting Holly Dev., Inc. v. Bd. of County Comm'rs, 140 Colo. 95, 105 , 342 P.2d 1032, 1038 (1959): "[Olverall plans or changes should be given such publicity as will reasonably inform those owners affected, as well as the public, of what is proposed."). | 1 | 1 |
Prock v. Town of Danvillegreen1 sentence2004See Prock v. Town of Danville, supra, 655 N.E.2d at 560 (“By making a promise to zone before a zoning hearing occurs, a municipality denigrates the statutory process because it purports to commit itself to certain action before listening to the public’s comments on that action.”) (quoting Dacy v. Village of Ruidoso, 114 N.M. 699 , 845 P.2d 793, 797 (1992)). | 1 | 1 |
Dacy v. Village of Ruidosogreen2 sentences2004See Prock v. Town of Danville, supra, 655 N.E.2d at 560 (“By making a promise to zone before a zoning hearing occurs, a municipality denigrates the statutory process because it purports to commit itself to certain action before listening to the public’s comments on that action.”) (quoting Dacy v. Village of Ruidoso, 114 N.M. 699 , 845 P.2d 793, 797 (1992)). 2004See Prock v. Town of Danville, supra, 655 N.E.2d at 560 (“By making a promise to zone before a zoning hearing occurs, a municipality denigrates the statutory process because it purports to commit itself to certain action before listening to the public’s comments on that action.”) (quoting Dacy v. Village of Ruidoso, 114 N.M. 699 , 845 P.2d 793, 797 (1992)). | 1 | 1 |
City & Cty. of Denver v. Chuck Ruward Chevrolet, Inc.green2 sentences1984See City & County of Denver v. Chuck Ruwart Chevrolet, Inc., 32 Colo.App. 191 , 508 P.2d 789 (1973). 1984See City & County of Denver v. Chuck Ruwart Chevrolet, Inc., 32 Colo.App. 191 , 508 P.2d 789 (1973). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Colorado. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Feit v. Donahue
green
1 sentence2008It required either the destruction and rebuilding of part of the existing house or the completion of an entirely new garage on the property." Id. | 1 | 2008–2008 |
People in Interest of MSH
green
1 sentence1992At trial, he testified that when he applied for a building permit to convert his garage into a family room and to build a detached garage, he was told, “Normally, we’d have you build the garage first [but] we’ll work with you.” Thereafter, the city issued to Donahue a certificate of occupancy which reiterated: “Con *413 vert existing garage to family, add det[ached] garage: Because it is within the province of the trial court to judge the credibility of witnesses and the sufficiency and weight of the evidence, People in Interest of M.S.H., 656 P.2d 1294 (Colo.1983), and there is ample evidence | 1 | 1992–1992 |
Conrad v. Jackson
green
2 sentences1981Boardman v. Davis, 231 Iowa 1227 , 3 N.W.2d 608 (1942); Conrad v. Jackson, 107 So.2d 369 (Fla.1958); Davis v. City of Abilene, 250 S.W.2d 685 (Tex.Civ.App.1952). 1981Boardman v. Davis, 231 Iowa 1227 , 3 N.W.2d 608 (1942); Conrad v. Jackson, 107 So.2d 369 (Fla.1958); Davis v. City of Abilene, 250 S.W.2d 685 (Tex.Civ.App.1952). | 1 | 1981–1981 |
Boardman v. Davis
green
2 sentences1981Boardman v. Davis, 231 Iowa 1227 , 3 N.W.2d 608 (1942); Conrad v. Jackson, 107 So.2d 369 (Fla.1958); Davis v. City of Abilene, 250 S.W.2d 685 (Tex.Civ.App.1952). 1981Boardman v. Davis, 231 Iowa 1227 , 3 N.W.2d 608 (1942); Conrad v. Jackson, 107 So.2d 369 (Fla.1958); Davis v. City of Abilene, 250 S.W.2d 685 (Tex.Civ.App.1952). | 1 | 1981–1981 |
Davis v. City of Abilene
green
2 sentences1981Boardman v. Davis, 231 Iowa 1227 , 3 N.W.2d 608 (1942); Conrad v. Jackson, 107 So.2d 369 (Fla.1958); Davis v. City of Abilene, 250 S.W.2d 685 (Tex.Civ.App.1952). 1981Boardman v. Davis, 231 Iowa 1227 , 3 N.W.2d 608 (1942); Conrad v. Jackson, 107 So.2d 369 (Fla.1958); Davis v. City of Abilene, 250 S.W.2d 685 (Tex.Civ.App.1952). | 1 | 1981–1981 |
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.