William F. Dwyer

This case involved a 13-year-old child appealing an order adjudicating him a juvenile delinquent based on a finding that he committed acts constituting burglary. The court reversed the judgment after determining that the child's confession was inadmissible under the Colorado Children's Code, which requires a parent or guardian to be present during police interrogation to provide guidance and ensure any waiver of rights is knowing and intelligent. Although the father was physically present, his own incarceration for unrelated charges meant he could not effectively advise the child, violating the statutory requirement. Without the confession, the remaining evidence from the arresting officer was insufficient to prove the essential elements of the offense, so the case was remanded for a new trial.

criminal lawprocedurefamily law

This case concerned a workers' compensation claim filed by the dependents of a truck driver who died from injuries sustained in a vehicle collision in Sioux Falls, South Dakota, while operating under a trip lease between Horn Transportation, Inc., his general employer, and Archer Freight Lines, Inc. The Industrial Commission awarded death benefits, determining that the driver was a special employee of Archer at the time of the accident, that the incident arose out of and in the course of employment, and that Horn had contractually agreed to provide coverage. The Colorado Court of Appeals upheld the Commission's findings that Archer was liable under the Workmen's Compensation Act because the driver was performing duties incidental to his employment while away from home and that the work was part of Archer's regular business. However, the court ruled that the Commission exceeded its jurisdiction by resolving the contractual dispute between the employers over payment responsibility, which must be addressed in a separate proceeding. The final order was set aside and the matter remanded for an order imposing liability solely on Archer consistent with the initial referee's determination.

labor & employment

Ella M. Hageman sued the trustee and beneficiaries of a revocable inter vivos trust created by her late husband, seeking to set aside the trust so she could claim her statutory one-half share of his estate as a surviving spouse. The Colorado Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's judgment for the defendants after a trial on stipulated facts. The court held that the husband had validly transferred title to the assets to the trustee during his lifetime, and the rights he retained did not render the trust illusory or a fraud on the spouse's rights; under precedent, a bona fide lifetime transfer defeats the surviving spouse's elective share even if that was the purpose. The court also rejected the claim that certain stock remained part of the probate estate, ruling that delivery of endorsed certificates completed the transfer to the trust.

family lawproperty

This case involved two contractors seeking to foreclose mechanics' liens against property owners for unpaid work on an apartment building, with Conditioned Air Company claiming $1,366 for installing an air conditioning system and Raymond Post claiming $2,584 for supplied materials. The trial court entered judgment for the lien claimants after denying the owners' motion for a trial continuance and rejecting their defense of accord and satisfaction. On appeal, the Colorado Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that the trial court acted within its discretion in denying the continuance because the owners had already received two prior continuances, discharged their attorneys knowing the trial date, and failed to exercise diligence in securing new counsel. The court further held that the evidence did not establish accord and satisfaction, as the owners' payments had been properly credited per the parties' agreement and the check notations alone did not settle the debts. The judgments were supported by the trial court's findings that the liens were properly perfected and all payments accounted for.

propertyprocedure

The case involved Valley Water District suing the City of Littleton after the city annexed part of the district known as Centennial Acres, seeking a money judgment for the value of water supplied to fire hydrants in the area and a declaratory judgment on the parties' respective rights and obligations. The court decided that Littleton had no obligation to pay Valley for the water or to maintain the hydrant service, and it dismissed the action. The core reasoning was that the annexation statutes impose no such duty on the city, the city possesses general power to provide fire protection but no obligation arises where an existing quasi-municipal system already supplies the service, and Valley was simply continuing to discharge its own preexisting duties rather than performing an obligation shifted to Littleton by annexation. The court also noted that a declaratory judgment on Valley's duties to its users was unavailable because the residents were not parties to the suit.

business & regulatoryproperty

The case involved a workers' compensation claim by Margaret Pickett for a back injury she sustained on October 12, 1970, while employed as a laundry worker at Colorado State Hospital. The Industrial Commission awarded her temporary total disability benefits, payment of authorized medical expenses, and compensation for a 2% permanent partial disability as a working unit, measured as of September 9, 1971, when she reached maximum medical improvement; it denied benefits for certain unauthorized medical expenses incurred after she changed physicians without consent. Pickett argued on review that her permanent disability should instead be measured as of October 27, 1970, the start of her unauthorized treatment, to reflect a higher degree of disability. The Colorado Court of Appeals affirmed the Commission's order, holding that the statute requires benefits based on the actual degree of permanent disability at maximum improvement and that the Act prohibits liability for medical expenses incurred without proper authorization from the employer, insurer, or Division of Labor.

labor & employment

The case involved a workers' compensation claim by Arthur Martinez, who suffered an industrial accident resulting in the amputation of his hand at the wrist. He sought additional compensation for permanent disability to his forearm beyond the scheduled award for loss of the hand at the wrist, but the Industrial Commission denied the extra claim after a referee found the forearm issues were not necessarily caused by the accident. The Colorado Court of Appeals reversed the Commission's final order, holding that the denial was unsupported by evidence since medical testimony established the forearm disability resulted from the accident and the referee's contrary finding had no evidentiary basis. The court clarified that while amputation compensation is limited to statutory schedules, a claimant may receive separate compensation for additional permanent disabilities sustained beyond the amputation itself.

labor & employment

The case involved a company suing a customer to recover money allegedly owed on an account for goods sold and delivered, with the customer denying the debt, asserting breach of contract as an affirmative defense, and filing a counterclaim for damages. At trial, the plaintiff introduced its book account as evidence of the debt without objection from the defendant, who then rested without presenting any evidence after his motion to dismiss was denied. The trial court entered judgment for the plaintiff. On appeal, the court affirmed, ruling that under the applicable Colorado statute, a properly admitted book account serves as prima facie evidence of the sale and delivery of the goods, which the defendant did not rebut.

business & regulatoryprocedure

The case involved a dispute between a former insurance broker-manager and his employer over whether the company could retain $3,363 in renewal commissions after the broker's bankruptcy discharge. The broker had received advances on those commissions under his employment contract and assigned the renewals as security for repayment; he listed the debt in his bankruptcy filing but the company kept the commissions when they later accrued. The trial court denied the broker's claim for the retained amount, and the Colorado Court of Appeals affirmed. The court held that a bankruptcy discharge releases only personal liability and does not extinguish valid liens existing at the time of adjudication; the pre-bankruptcy assignment created an equitable lien on the commissions that attached when premiums were paid and related back to the assignment date. It further noted that the commissions were based on services performed before bankruptcy, distinguishing the assignment from prohibited post-petition wage assignments.

business & regulatorylabor & employmentprocedure

In Greer v. Greer, a divorced husband appealed the denial of his motion to terminate monthly payments to his ex-wife after her remarriage; the original 1969 divorce decree had ordered him to pay $150 per month for four years, explicitly tied to her financial support of him during medical school. The Colorado Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's ruling that the obligation continued despite the remarriage. The court reasoned that the fixed payments, though labeled alimony, constituted a non-modifiable property division or alimony in gross under C.R.S. 1963, 46-1-5, rather than ongoing support, and therefore did not terminate upon remarriage.

family lawproperty

The City of Denver sued to enjoin automobile dealer Chuck Ruwart Chevrolet from using R-4 zoned property for car sales and storage, a use prohibited by the municipal zoning ordinance. Ruwart defended by asserting that the ordinance was unconstitutional as applied and sought declaratory and injunctive relief against enforcement. The trial court granted the injunction, and the Colorado Court of Appeals affirmed, ruling that zoning ordinances are presumed valid and that Ruwart's evidence was insufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the property could not be put to any reasonable lawful use, as profitability or highest-and-best-use arguments do not establish a constitutional violation.

propertybusiness & regulatory

The case involved homeowners in one subdivision seeking to prevent a bank from constructing a commercial building on a lot in an adjacent subdivision, citing restrictive covenants limiting use to single-family dwellings in the first subdivision. The trial court granted summary judgment to the bank, finding that the plaintiffs lacked standing to enforce the covenants because their property was in a separate subdivision. The appellate court affirmed, reasoning that the subdivisions were developed separately without a unified general plan or scheme, as evidenced by separate plats and varying covenant recordings, so enforcement rights were limited to owners within the same subdivision.

property

This case concerned a dispute over whether plaintiff Margaret Willis could enforce a lien on real property that originated in her 1958 divorce decree from Harvey L. Neilson, which required monthly payments secured by specific real estate, after Harvey conveyed the property to his brother, defendant Sherman W. Neilson, and then died without an estate proceeding. The trial court ruled that Willis held a valid, enforceable lien and entered a foreclosure judgment, which the Colorado Court of Appeals affirmed. The court reasoned that the lien attached to the property during Harvey's lifetime by operation of the final divorce decree and survived his death, remaining enforceable directly against the real estate regardless of the lack of estate administration or the subsequent abatement of a pending motion in the divorce action; the defendant's title under the quitclaim deed was subject to the prior recorded lien, and Colorado nonclaim statutes expressly preserve the rights of secured creditors to pursue their collateral.

family lawpropertyprocedure

This case involved a dispute over compensation owed to a real estate agent, James Stank, for assisting Ervin Michaelson in purchasing property from Temple Buell College. Stank sued for a 6% commission on the $134,500 sale price, while Michaelson maintained that the parties had agreed on a flat $1,000 fee, which he had already paid. The trial court ruled in Stank's favor, finding no express agreement on compensation and awarding the customary broker's commission. On appeal, the Colorado Court of Appeals reversed, holding that Stank was not entitled to a broker's commission because he had not acted as a procuring cause in the transaction—he merely assisted with a purchase Michaelson had already planned—and evidence of customary commissions was therefore inadmissible.

business & regulatoryproperty

This case involved a rear-end car collision where plaintiff Moore sued defendant Fischer for personal injuries sustained while driving a work van. The trial court directed a verdict on liability for the plaintiff, and a jury awarded damages of $19,662. On appeal, the Colorado Court of Appeals rejected the seat belt defense as unavailable in negligence actions, upheld the directed verdict on liability based on the defendant's admission of hitting the plaintiff's vehicle from behind, and found no prejudice from testimony about a traffic ticket since liability was not submitted to the jury. The court reversed the judgment, however, due to a procedural deficiency in plaintiff's failure to join or prove assignment from his employer's workers' compensation insurance carrier, which had paid benefits, and remanded for further proceedings to address the real party in interest issue.

torts & liabilityprocedure

The case involved debtors who purchased a car on installment contract, defaulted on payments, and had the vehicle repossessed and sold by the dealer without prior notice after the credit company reassigned the contract. The collection agency, as assignee, sued the debtors for a deficiency judgment, while the debtors counterclaimed for damages under the Uniform Commercial Code for failure to provide notice of sale and also sought relief against the dealer and credit company. The trial court ruled that UCC notice requirements did not apply to repossessed automobiles and granted the deficiency while dismissing the debtors' claims. On appeal, the Colorado Court of Appeals held that automobiles are not collateral sold on a recognized market, so reasonable notice was required under C.R.S.1963, 155-9-504(3); the lack of notice barred the deficiency judgment against the debtors and made the dealer liable for statutory damages, but the credit company had no liability as it did not conduct the sale. The court reversed the deficiency and the dismissal of claims against the dealer, affirmed the judgment for the credit company, and remanded for further proceedings.

business & regulatoryproperty

The case involved two passengers suing the driver of a pickup truck for personal injuries sustained when the vehicle left a winding highway and overturned after the driver lost control on a curve. Following a jury trial, the trial court entered judgment awarding damages to the plaintiffs under Colorado's guest statute, which requires proof of negligence consisting of willful and wanton disregard for others' safety, and the Court of Appeals affirmed. The court held that evidence of the driver's excessive speed (admittedly 15 mph over the limit, with testimony suggesting up to 70-75 mph), combined with his knowledge of a steering defect, on a dark downhill road was sufficient for the jury to find willful and wanton conduct. It also upheld the jury instructions defining such negligence and the voir dire questions about insurance coverage.

torts & liabilityprocedure

In Saunders v. Bankston, the plaintiff, who purchased land at a tax sale and held a certificate of purchase, sought to set aside a certificate of redemption issued to the defendants after they recorded a quitclaim deed to the property. The district court dismissed the complaint, but the Colorado Court of Appeals reversed, finding that the complaint stated a valid claim because the defendants allegedly had no legal or equitable interest in the property and thus no statutory right to redeem it under the relevant tax laws. The court also held that the action was not barred by res judicata from a prior related case, as the denial of the plaintiff's motion to intervene in that case was not an adjudication on the merits of her claims.

propertyproceduretaxes

In Jordan v. Loveland Skiing Corporation, plaintiff Janice Jordan sued the ski lift operator for personal injuries after her clothing became entangled in a chair, causing her to be carried past the unloading ramp and fall while going around the bull wheel. A jury returned a verdict for the defendant, and the Colorado Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment. The court held that the evidence on negligence and proximate cause was conflicting, so the issues were properly submitted to the jury rather than resolved by directed verdict. It also ruled that res ipsa loquitur did not apply because the accident was not of a type that ordinarily implies negligence and could have involved plaintiff's own actions, and that the given jury instructions on the operator's duty to an invitee were sufficient.

torts & liabilityprocedure

The case involved a lawsuit by Carl Mees against Louis G. Canino to collect on a promissory note that Canino had signed. Mees claimed the note was for $27,000 principal, payable in monthly installments of $225, while Canino argued the principal was only $225 based on the wording in the note. The trial court entered judgment for the full $27,000 plus interest, and the Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that the note must be read as a whole to determine the parties' intent, and the statute preferring words over figures did not resolve the ambiguity here.

business & regulatory