justice richard gabriel
-
Justice Melissa Hart to step down from Colorado Supreme Court
—
by
Justice Melissa Hart will step down from the Colorado Supreme Court effective Jan. 5, the Judicial Department announced unexpectedly on Friday. Hart has been on an unexplained and unusual leave of absence from the court since Oct. 28. She told Colorado Politics in November that the leave was for “family and personal health reasons” but provided no…
-
Justices debate what to do when governments withhold key info from plaintiffs
—
by
Members of the Colorado Supreme Court seemed to be on different pages when they considered on Tuesday whether a woman injured by a sidewalk defect in Manitou Springs was forever barred from suing the actual entity responsible because she did not learn until it was too late that Colorado Springs was the proper defendant. The…
-
Colorado justices splinter over approach to sentencing review
—
by
Members of the Colorado Supreme Court were divided on Monday about whether vehicular homicide stemming from intoxicated driving is “grave and serious” in every possible scenario, with two justices suggesting the court reconfigure its approach for determining the proportionality of criminal sentences. The Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment means sentences cannot be…
-
Colorado Supreme Court to examine whether corporations can be liable for ‘felonious killing’
—
by
The Colorado Supreme Court recently announced that it will determine whether corporations can be liable for a “felonious killing,” meaning there is no limit to the damages they might pay for pain and suffering after causing a wrongful death. At least three of the court’s seven members must agree to take a case on appeal.…
-
Colorado justices ponder scope of law curbing insurers’ ability to allege failure to cooperate
—
by
Members of the Colorado Supreme Court pondered a question last week that could have sweeping ramifications for those making insurance claims: When the legislature required insurance companies to take certain steps before accusing policyholders of failing to cooperate in an investigation, do those protections apply to every request an insurer might make? Leading up to…
-
Colorado justices consider whether to restore $5.7 million award to RTD subcontractor
—
by
Members of the Colorado Supreme Court considered last week whether the Court of Appeals incorrectly threw out a $5.7 million award to a company that helped build a commuter rail line and, in doing so, deterred public works contractors from seeking to recover money they are owed through the process envisioned in state law. Ralph…
-
Colorado justices sympathetic to defendant’s claim of speedy trial violation
—
by
Members of the Colorado Supreme Court appeared sympathetic on Wednesday to the argument that an El Paso County prosecutor made an unjustified decision to file a mid-case appeal, pushing the trial beyond the legal deadline and requiring dismissal of the charges. The Supreme Court originally took an interest in Khristina Phillips’ ongoing misdemeanor prosecution in…
-
Colorado justices receptive to allowing lawyers to ‘borrow’ allegations from elsewhere
—
by
Members of the Colorado Supreme Court seemed open on Tuesday to the idea that plaintiffs’ lawyers can use allegations made elsewhere to bolster their own clients’ claims, so long as the attorney first performs some degree of investigation into the “borrowed” assertions. Under Colorado’s rules for civil cases, attorneys must attest that the complaints they…
-
Colorado justices skeptical that Colorado Springs is immune to crash caused by faulty signal
—
by
Members of the Colorado Supreme Court seemed doubtful on Wednesday that the city of Colorado Springs cannot be sued over a collision that occurred as a result of traffic lights that were functioning normally in one direction, but were inoperative in the perpendicular direction. Construction was occurring at the intersection of South Tejon Street and…
-
Colorado justices address conflict between anti-SLAPP law, state constitution
—
by
Colorado lawmakers in 2019 created a mechanism to quickly dispose of lawsuits over conduct that implicates a person’s First Amendment rights, specifically the rights to free speech and to petition the government. Known as the “anti-SLAPP” law, which stands for “strategic lawsuits against public participation,” the legislature provided that when a judge rules on a motion…