lengthy hearing (Colorado) · Go Syfert
← Colorado issues

lengthy hearing in Colorado

6 Colorado opinions name it 2 courts 1965–2018 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.

Followed or applied (4)

CaseFollowedCited
McMullins v. McMullinsgreen
alacivapp · 2016 · cited in 1 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2018–2018
1 sentence

2018See McMullins v. McMullins, 202 So. 3d 332, 337-38 (Ala. Civ.

11
Cubbage v. Leepgreen
colo · 1958 · cited in 1 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2011–2011
2 sentences

2011Instead, we engaged in a lengthy analysis of the role of foreseeability as it relates to a "tavern proprietor's legal duty of care to patrons and other persons legitimately on the tavern premises." Id. at 467 ; see also Vigil v. Pine, 176 Colo. 884 , 388, 490 P.2d 934, 936 (1971) (addressing whether tavern owner should not serve person known to have violent tendencies); Cubbage v. Leep, 187 Colo. 286 , 289 323 P.2d 1109, 1110 (1958) (noting that there was no evidence that any party was intoxicated in case about tavern owner's duty to protect patrons).

2011Although we concluded that a tavern proprietor is not "a virtual insurer of the safety of all persons legitimately on its premises," this determination was completely separate from the tavern's well-established duty "not to serve alcoholic beverages to a visibly intoxicated patron. 5 Id. at 466, 469, 323 P.2d 1109 .

11
Vigil v. Pine, Jr.green
colo · 1971 · cited in 1 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2011–2011
1 sentence

2011Instead, we engaged in a lengthy analysis of the role of foreseeability as it relates to a "tavern proprietor's legal duty of care to patrons and other persons legitimately on the tavern premises." Id. at 467 ; see also Vigil v. Pine, 176 Colo. 884 , 388, 490 P.2d 934, 936 (1971) (addressing whether tavern owner should not serve person known to have violent tendencies); Cubbage v. Leep, 187 Colo. 286 , 289 323 P.2d 1109, 1110 (1958) (noting that there was no evidence that any party was intoxicated in case about tavern owner's duty to protect patrons).

11
People v. Genningsgreen
colo · 1991 · cited in 1 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 1997–1997
2 sentences

1997See People v. Gennings, supra; see also Arizona v. Fulmi-nante, supra. Here, after a lengthy hearing and after viewing many hours of the videotaped interviews with defendant, the trial court made clear, specific findings relating to each factor specified in People v. Gennings, supra. Based on the totality of the circumstances, it determined with full record support that, although coercive techniques were used at various points in the interrogation, defendant’s final statements regarding his role in the offenses nevertheless were voluntary and did not result from coercive police tactics.

1997See People v. Gennings, supra; see also Arizona v. Fulmi-nante, supra. Here, after a lengthy hearing and after viewing many hours of the videotaped interviews with defendant, the trial court made clear, specific findings relating to each factor specified in People v. Gennings, supra. Based on the totality of the circumstances, it determined with full record support that, although coercive techniques were used at various points in the interrogation, defendant’s final statements regarding his role in the offenses nevertheless were voluntary and did not result from coercive police tactics.

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

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

Also cited on this issue (5)

CaseCitedYears
Cerit v. Cerit green
hid · 2002
1 sentence

2012Additionally, the Denver trial court satisfied the UCCJEA's objectives of ensuring that the children were protected from threatened mistreatment or abuse, while at the same time providing that custody, or allocation of parental responsibilities, would be determined by Canada as the children's home state under section 14-13-102(7)(a), C.R.S. 2011. ¶ 34 We are not persuaded otherwise by Cerit v. Cerit, 188 F.Supp.2d 1239 (D.Haw. 2002), on which mother relies.

12012–2012
Observatory Corp. v. Daly green
colo · 1989
1 sentence

2011Instead, we engaged in a lengthy analysis of the role of foreseeability as it relates to a "tavern proprietor's legal duty of care to patrons and other persons legitimately on the tavern premises." Id. at 467 ; see also Vigil v. Pine, 176 Colo. 884 , 388, 490 P.2d 934, 936 (1971) (addressing whether tavern owner should not serve person known to have violent tendencies); Cubbage v. Leep, 187 Colo. 286 , 289 323 P.2d 1109, 1110 (1958) (noting that there was no evidence that any party was intoxicated in case about tavern owner's duty to protect patrons).

12011–2011
Welch v. State green
oklacrimapp · 1944
1 sentence

1967Crim. 180 , 146 P.2d 141 , a lengthy analysis of the distinction between false pretense and larceny is made and numerous cases are cited supporting the following rule of law as enunciated by the court.

11967–1967
Jordan v. Jordan neutral
colo · 1947
2 sentences

1965It assertedly and obviously was copied almost verbatim from an instruction which appeared in Mr. Justice Hilliard's dissent in Winbern v. People, 116 Colo. 136, 152-153 , 180 P.2d 516 (1947).

1965It assertedly and obviously was copied almost verbatim from an instruction which appeared in Mr. Justice Hilliard’s dissent in Winbern v. People, 116 Colo. 136, 152-53 , 180 P.2d 516 (1947).

11965–1965
Winbern v. People neutral
colo · 1947
2 sentences

1965It assertedly and obviously was copied almost verbatim from an instruction which appeared in Mr. Justice Hilliard's dissent in Winbern v. People, 116 Colo. 136, 152-153 , 180 P.2d 516 (1947).

1965It assertedly and obviously was copied almost verbatim from an instruction which appeared in Mr. Justice Hilliard’s dissent in Winbern v. People, 116 Colo. 136, 152-53 , 180 P.2d 516 (1947).

11965–1965

Where else courts name it

CA 80 (1931–2026) IL 30 (1937–2025) TX 28 (1977–2024) NY 27 (1961–2016) OH 24 (1985–2026) PA 23 (1965–2026) FL 23 (1932–2020) GA 18 (1974–2017) MI 12 (1986–2025) AL 12 (1979–2016) WY 11 (1980–2023) MS 11 (1975–2022) IA 10 (1976–2019) NJ 10 (1958–2019) CT 10 (1987–2019) LA 10 (1975–2015) IN 9 (1928–2018) KS 8 (1928–2019) MO 8 (1972–2025) NM 8 (1967–2018) MD 7 (1978–2022) WA 7 (2006–2020) TN 6 (1928–2016) CO 6 (1965–2018) OR 6 (1959–2025) NC 6 (1981–2017) MA 6 (1990–2024) DC 5 (1984–2013) SC 5 (1974–2024) WV 5 (1980–2017) OK 5 (1961–2010) MT 5 (1929–2006) KY 4 (1969–2014) MN 4 (1990–2015) AZ 4 (1975–2003) AR 3 (1952–2014) ME 3 (1966–2003) RI 3 (2001–2016) DE 3 (1944–2026) WI 3 (2000–2007) VT 3 (1980–2007) ID 3 (1986–2019) UT 2 (2011–2023) HI 2 (1924–2010) SD 2 (1942–1996) VA 2 (1937–1999)

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