6 Colorado opinions name it 2 courts 2004–2025 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 |
|---|---|---|
Harper v. Peoplegreen1 sentence2025See Owens, ¶ 133. ¶ 59 We aren’t persuaded otherwise by Quinlan’s argument that Harper v. People, 817 P.2d 77 (Colo. 1991), provides the governing legal test. | 1 | 1 |
Woodward v. BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF TACOgreen1 sentence2024As Woodward explains, the fiduciary duty owed by a homeowners’ association contains a reasonableness component, requiring that the 27 association “use its authority to enforce protective covenants in good faith and in a reasonable manner.” 155 P.3d at 624 (emphasis added). ¶ 57 The Pucas nevertheless contend that the Association seeks to excuse its delay under the business judgment rule, which they say doesn’t apply because the Association wasn’t exercising any discretion when enforcing the governing documents. | 1 | 1 |
Coors Brewing Co. v. Cabogreen1 sentence2021See Coors Brewing , 114 P.3d at 66 (holding that the merits of an arbit ration award could not be attacked where the parties’ agree ment designated “Colorado law” as the governing legal standard). | 1 | 1 |
Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 98,943 Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. And Sam Alberico v. Stanley F. Jarosgreen1 sentence2004The governing law alleged to have been ignored by the arbitrators must be well defined, explicit, and clearly applicable.” (citations omitted)); see also Bowen v. Amoco Pipeline Co., 254 F.3d 925, 937 (10th Cir. 2001); Barnes v. Logan, 122 F.3d 820, 821-22 (9th Cir.1997); Prudential-Bache Sec., Inc. v. Tanner, 72 F.3d 234 , 239 (1st Cir. 1995); Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. Jaros, 70 F.3d 418, 421 (6th Cir.1995); Lee v. Chica, 983 F.2d 883, 885 (8th Cir.1993); Upshur Coals Corp. v. United Mine Workers, 933 F.2d 225 , 228 (4th Cir. 1991); News Am. | 1 | 1 |
Bowen v. Amoco Pipeline Co.green1 sentence2004The governing law alleged to have been ignored by the arbitrators must be well defined, explicit, and clearly applicable.” (citations omitted)); see also Bowen v. Amoco Pipeline Co., 254 F.3d 925, 937 (10th Cir. 2001); Barnes v. Logan, 122 F.3d 820, 821-22 (9th Cir.1997); Prudential-Bache Sec., Inc. v. Tanner, 72 F.3d 234 , 239 (1st Cir. 1995); Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. Jaros, 70 F.3d 418, 421 (6th Cir.1995); Lee v. Chica, 983 F.2d 883, 885 (8th Cir.1993); Upshur Coals Corp. v. United Mine Workers, 933 F.2d 225 , 228 (4th Cir. 1991); News Am. | 1 | 1 |
In the Matter of Arbitration Between Judy Lee, Appellant/cross-Appellee v. James John Chica Engler-Budd & Co., Inc., Appellees/cross-Appellantsgreen1 sentence2004The governing law alleged to have been ignored by the arbitrators must be well defined, explicit, and clearly applicable.” (citations omitted)); see also Bowen v. Amoco Pipeline Co., 254 F.3d 925, 937 (10th Cir. 2001); Barnes v. Logan, 122 F.3d 820, 821-22 (9th Cir.1997); Prudential-Bache Sec., Inc. v. Tanner, 72 F.3d 234 , 239 (1st Cir. 1995); Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. Jaros, 70 F.3d 418, 421 (6th Cir.1995); Lee v. Chica, 983 F.2d 883, 885 (8th Cir.1993); Upshur Coals Corp. v. United Mine Workers, 933 F.2d 225 , 228 (4th Cir. 1991); News Am. | 1 | 1 |
Milton BARNES, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Martin LOGAN, Koren Logan, Trustees for the Logan Inter Vivos Trust, Respondents-Appelleesgreen1 sentence2004The governing law alleged to have been ignored by the arbitrators must be well defined, explicit, and clearly applicable.” (citations omitted)); see also Bowen v. Amoco Pipeline Co., 254 F.3d 925, 937 (10th Cir. 2001); Barnes v. Logan, 122 F.3d 820, 821-22 (9th Cir.1997); Prudential-Bache Sec., Inc. v. Tanner, 72 F.3d 234 , 239 (1st Cir. 1995); Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. Jaros, 70 F.3d 418, 421 (6th Cir.1995); Lee v. Chica, 983 F.2d 883, 885 (8th Cir.1993); Upshur Coals Corp. v. United Mine Workers, 933 F.2d 225 , 228 (4th Cir. 1991); News Am. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Colorado. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
People v. Loper
green
1 sentence2020In discussing the governing legal framework, the trial court correctly identified the controlling statute; acknowledged the demise of the former “appearance of impropriety” standard; accurately recited the defendant’s burden of proof; focused on whether “extreme” circumstances demonstrated that the defendant was unlikely to receive a fair trial; and discussed the guiding principles in People v. Loper, 241 P.3d 543 (Colo. 2010), and People v. Chavez, 139 P.3d 649 (Colo. 2006), to which the majority points today. 1 ¶44 Despite this textbook work, the majority concludes that the trial court blund | 1 | 2020–2020 |
People v. Chavez
green
1 sentence2020In discussing the governing legal framework, the trial court correctly identified the controlling statute; acknowledged the demise of the former “appearance of impropriety” standard; accurately recited the defendant’s burden of proof; focused on whether “extreme” circumstances demonstrated that the defendant was unlikely to receive a fair trial; and discussed the guiding principles in People v. Loper, 241 P.3d 543 (Colo. 2010), and People v. Chavez, 139 P.3d 649 (Colo. 2006), to which the majority points today. 1 ¶44 Despite this textbook work, the majority concludes that the trial court blund | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Deutsche Bank Trust Co. Americas v. Samora
green
1 sentence2013Id. | 1 | 2013–2013 |
cluster 710031
green
1 sentence2004The governing law alleged to have been ignored by the arbitrators must be well defined, explicit, and clearly applicable.” (citations omitted)); see also Bowen v. Amoco Pipeline Co., 254 F.3d 925, 937 (10th Cir. 2001); Barnes v. Logan, 122 F.3d 820, 821-22 (9th Cir.1997); Prudential-Bache Sec., Inc. v. Tanner, 72 F.3d 234 , 239 (1st Cir. 1995); Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. Jaros, 70 F.3d 418, 421 (6th Cir.1995); Lee v. Chica, 983 F.2d 883, 885 (8th Cir.1993); Upshur Coals Corp. v. United Mine Workers, 933 F.2d 225 , 228 (4th Cir. 1991); News Am. | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Upshur Coals Corporation v. United Mine Workers Of America
green
1 sentence2004The governing law alleged to have been ignored by the arbitrators must be well defined, explicit, and clearly applicable.” (citations omitted)); see also Bowen v. Amoco Pipeline Co., 254 F.3d 925, 937 (10th Cir. 2001); Barnes v. Logan, 122 F.3d 820, 821-22 (9th Cir.1997); Prudential-Bache Sec., Inc. v. Tanner, 72 F.3d 234 , 239 (1st Cir. 1995); Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. Jaros, 70 F.3d 418, 421 (6th Cir.1995); Lee v. Chica, 983 F.2d 883, 885 (8th Cir.1993); Upshur Coals Corp. v. United Mine Workers, 933 F.2d 225 , 228 (4th Cir. 1991); News Am. | 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.