Case # | Name | Category | Court | Judge | Published |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
99-4117
|
Mauney v. CBS; Caroline Film Corp.
Order |
Civil Procedure |
|
Apr. 18, 2000 | |
99-8097
|
U.S. v. McCarty
Order |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
Apr. 18, 2000 | |
99-3282
|
U.S. v. One Parcel Property Located at Lots 55, 57 and 59
Order |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
Apr. 18, 2000 | |
99-2125
|
Silva v. Good will Industries of New Mexico
Order |
Employment Law |
|
Apr. 18, 2000 | |
99-3198
|
U.S. v. Taylor
Order |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
Apr. 18, 2000 | |
99-5080
|
Bradley v. Gear Products
Order |
Employment Law |
|
Apr. 18, 2000 | |
99-4044
|
U.S. v. Wald
Trunk search unlawful where evidence discovered in passenger compartment is not sufficient to corroborate suspicion aroused by smell of burnt methamphetamine. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
Apr. 18, 2000 | |
99-4123
|
U.S. v. Ramirez
To suppress evidence, accused must demonstrate factual nexus between the alleged unlawful detention and subsequently discovered evidence. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
Apr. 18, 2000 | |
98-5061
|
Cardtoons L.C. v. Major League Baseball Players Assn.
Noerr-Pennington doctrine does not provide immunity for purely private threats of litigation. |
Torts |
|
Apr. 18, 2000 | |
99-4129
|
Trotter v. Internal Revenue Service
Order |
Taxation |
|
Apr. 18, 2000 | |
99-1470
|
Bollman v. Arapahoe County District Attorney
Order |
Civil Rights |
|
Apr. 18, 2000 | |
99-4095
|
U.S. v. Santos
Order |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
Apr. 18, 2000 | |
99-2143
|
Ortiz v. United States Border Patrol
Order |
Torts |
|
Apr. 18, 2000 | |
98CA1799
|
People v. Nelson
Three-year mandatory period of parole is required for each defendant sentenced to Department of Corrections. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
Apr. 18, 2000 | |
98-4074
|
Stone v. Autoliv Asp Inc.
Single discriminatory comment is not sufficient to find that discharge decision was discriminatory. |
Employment Law |
|
Apr. 18, 2000 | |
98-1408
|
Vanderhurst v. Colorado Mountain College District
College, accused of employment discrimination for offensive speech, must raise First Amendment issues at trial to preserve error. |
Civil Rights |
|
Apr. 18, 2000 | |
99-4097
|
U.S. v. Ramirez-Soberanes
Order |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
Apr. 18, 2000 | |
98-1075
|
Blackhawk-Central City Sanitation District v. American Guarantee and Liability Insurance Co.
Insurance carriers duty to defend arises when, arguably, there is policy coverage. |
Insurance |
|
Apr. 18, 2000 | |
98-4078
|
U.S. v. Codner
Order |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
Apr. 18, 2000 | |
99-8035
|
Fleming v. Uphoff
Order |
Civil Procedure |
|
Apr. 18, 2000 | |
99-1209
|
Gamble v. Carlton
Order |
Civil Procedure |
|
Apr. 18, 2000 | |
99-4137
|
U.S. v. Torres-Centeno
Order |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
Apr. 18, 2000 | |
98-5262
|
Tutton v. ABC Supply Co.
Order |
Employment Law |
|
Apr. 18, 2000 | |
99-7099
|
Montgomery v. Kaiser
Order |
Civil Rights |
|
Apr. 18, 2000 | |
98CA2342
|
Rocky Mountain Properties v. Purified H20 To Go Co.
Three-day notice is required prior to commencement of unlawful detainer action. |
Real Property |
|
Apr. 18, 2000 | |
99CA0023
|
People v. Forester
Unauthorized departure from non-residential community corrections placement constitutes escape. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
Apr. 18, 2000 | |
99CA0687
|
Meadows v. Saville
Federal and state fair housing laws require owners of mobile home parks to accommodate tenants with disabilities. |
Real Property |
|
Apr. 18, 2000 | |
99CA0805
|
Colorado State Board of Dental Examiners v. Norton
Dentists failure to fill cavities at request of patient is sufficient grounds for discipline by state dental board. |
Administrative Agencies |
|
Apr. 18, 2000 | |
99CA0975
|
TCI Satellite Entertainment, Inc. v. Board of Equalization of Montezuma County
Satellite dish company which leases equipment to customers not eligible for exemption from personal property tax. |
Taxation |
|
Apr. 18, 2000 | |
99CA2009
|
L.J.P., a Minor
Obligation of non-prevailing party to pay costs of genetic testing not affected by presumption of paternity. |
Family Law |
|
Apr. 18, 2000 |