Hilbert Schauer

The case involved a dispute over the appointment of a receiver and distribution of net profits from operating a 13-unit motel in Colorado Springs after Phillips defaulted on a deed of trust securing a promissory note held by the Websters. The trial court appointed Florence Webster as receiver under the deed of trust terms and state statute due to defaults in payments and maintenance, approved her final report after the foreclosure sale, and ordered distribution of remaining funds including payments for receiver fees, taxes, and the balance to Phillips. The appellate court affirmed, holding that statutory and contractual grounds supported the receivership given the property's condition and defaults, but once the Websters bid the full debt amount at the public trustee sale and received the deed, their rights to the profits ended and the net balance belonged to Phillips as record owner. The court directed specific distributions from the registry funds totaling $6,976.99, with $2,290.57 to Phillips after approved deductions.

propertyprocedure

This case involved a workers' compensation claim by a head waitress injured when she slipped on ice outside her apartment while traveling there for a private work-related conference with her manager after her usual quitting time. The Industrial Commission denied the claim under the general rule that injuries sustained going to or from work are not compensable, but the district court reversed and reinstated an award recommended by the referee. The Colorado Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the injury was compensable because the claimant was acting under the employer's express or implied direction as part of her supervisory duties, creating an exception to the going-and-coming rule where the employment created the necessity for the travel. The court rejected arguments about jurisdiction and fact-finding deference, noting the facts were undisputed and the conference was within the course of employment. The judgment directed the Commission to enter a consistent award.

labor & employment

The case involved claims by the parents of a newborn child born with permanent brain damage allegedly due to lack of oxygen immediately after birth at a county hospital in Colorado. The plaintiffs asserted multiple claims sounding in both tort (negligence) and contract against the attending physician, the county, the hospital, its board of trustees, and the administrator. The trial court dismissed all claims against the county, hospital, trustees, and related defendants on grounds including sovereign immunity, while allowing the case to proceed only against the doctor and administrator. The Colorado Supreme Court reversed those dismissals, holding that the amended complaint stated viable causes of action if supported by proof, that the trial court had prematurely addressed sovereign immunity and governmental capacity issues without evidence, and that contract-based claims might not be subject to immunity defenses.

torts & liabilityprocedurehealthcare

This case is a quiet title action concerning ownership of a placer mining claim in Gilpin County, Colorado, including surface rights, mineral rights, water rights, and road access. Plaintiff Gilpin Investment Co. claimed a six-acre tract based on a chain of title starting with a 1921 deed that reserved mineral rights to the grantor, followed by tax deeds conveying only 'surface ground.' Defendant Sleeping Giant Co. claimed the full claim, including minerals, through a 1961 deed tracing back to the original owner. The court held that the plaintiff owns only the surface of its six-acre tract (subject to road reservations and non-conflicting mining access), while the defendant owns the minerals and the remainder of the claim. The reasoning was that tax deeds convey only the interest assessed and held by the delinquent taxpayer, which excluded the previously reserved minerals, and the plaintiff had no color of title to the minerals under the statute of limitations.

propertytaxes

The case involved a public utility seeking to construct a transmission line across property in El Paso County after the county commissioners denied a building permit; the utility attempted to override the denial under a state statute, prompting the county to obtain a temporary restraining order from the district court halting construction. The Colorado Supreme Court held that the district court's temporary restraining order was void because it failed to comply with the requirements of Rule 65 of the Colorado Rules of Civil Procedure, as established in prior precedent. The Court further ruled that the district court lacked jurisdiction over the dispute, which instead fell exclusively under the authority of the Public Utilities Commission pursuant to the state constitution and statutes governing utility services, extensions, and facilities. As a result, the Court directed the district court to vacate the restraining order and dismiss the underlying action without prejudice.

business & regulatorypropertyprocedure

This case involved a lawsuit by a father, both as guardian for his four-and-a-half-year-old son injured in a pedestrian-vehicle accident and in his personal capacity for medical expenses. The plaintiff alleged negligence by the defendant driver, who struck the child while driving at moderate speed on a highway at night; the defendant raised defenses including contributory negligence and unavoidable accident. The trial court granted the defendant's motion to dismiss at the close of evidence, finding no prima facie case of negligence. The appellate court affirmed the dismissal, holding that the undisputed evidence showed the defendant acted as a reasonably prudent person under the circumstances and that the plaintiff failed to meet the burden of proving actionable negligence.

torts & liabilityprocedure