reopening claim (Colorado) · Go Syfert
← Colorado issues

reopening claim in Colorado

6 Colorado opinions name it 2 courts 1982–2016 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 (0)

CaseFollowedCited
No positive-treatment citations attached to this issue in Colorado.

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
Berg v. Industrial Claim Appeals Office of the State green
coloctapp · 2005
2 sentences

2016Although the claimant’s petition to reopen was filed soon after the claim’s closure, because the claimant was unaware of the extent of his injuries when the claim was closed, Berg rejected the Panel’s conclusion that the claimant was strategically attempting to avoid the higher burden of proof required to overcome a DIME. 128 P.3d at 273-74 .

2016Although the claimant's petition to reopen was filed soon after the claim's closure, because the claimant was unaware of the extent of his injuries when the claim was closed, Berg rejected the Panel's conclusion that the claimant was strategically attempting to avoid the higher burden of proof required to overcome a DIME. 128 P.3d at 273 -74 .

22016–2016
Koch Industries, Inc. v. Pena green
coloctapp · 1995
1 sentence

1996See § 8-43-303; Gregorich v. Industrial Commission, supra; Koch Industries, Inc. v. Pena, supra; Travelers Insurance Co. v. Industrial Commission, supra. We also agree with the Panel that, contrary to claimant’s argument, it is immaterial to the reopening analysis under the foregoing statutory criteria whether the prior order premised on a mistake of law has been upheld by an appellate court, as it was here in the Larimer County decision.

11996–1996
Loffland Bros. Co. v. Industrial Claim Appeals Office green
coloctapp · 1988
2 sentences

1989Id.

1989Id.

11989–1989
Wallace v. INDUS. COM'N OF STATE OF COLO. green
coloctapp · 1981
1 sentence

1985Section 8-53-113, C.R.S. (1985 Cum.Supp.); Wallace v. Industrial Commission, 629 P.2d 1091 (Colo.App.1981).

11985–1985
Berkley Moving & Storage Co. v. Eubank neutral
colo · 1977
2 sentences

1982Berkley Moving & Storage Co. v. Eubank, 193 Colo. 334 , 566 P.2d 359 (1977) is determinative.

1982Berkley Moving & Storage Co. v. Eubank, 193 Colo. 334 , 566 P.2d 359 (1977) is determinative.

11982–1982

Statutes the citing opinions construe

CO § Colo. Rev. Stat. § 8-43-303 (3)

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.

Where else courts name it

NY 24 (1930–2022) WV 21 (1945–2026) WA 15 (1935–2016) AZ 14 (1966–2017) CO 6 (1982–2016) KY 5 (1997–2016) PA 4 (1995–2020) OR 4 (1974–2019) OH 3 (2014–2024) IA 3 (2014–2020) IL 2 (2013–2013) OK 2 (1936–2001) MD 2 (1985–1993)

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