Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

County of Adams v. Hibbard

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided June 17, 1996No. 94SC757Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partJustice Mullarkey

I concur in the majority’s partial reversal of the court of appeals’ judgment. I respectfully dissent, however, from the majority’s holding that the individual defendants, Robert J. Loew and Darrel L. Matteson, violated the procedural and substantive due process rights of the plaintiffs, Dean Hibbard and H.D. Garrison.

The plaintiffs brought this action in the district court alleging an unlawful taking of their property and the deprivation of their due process rights. The takings claim has been abandoned in this court and the majority rightly does not address that claim. The due process claim,…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Zinermon v. BurchSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
  2. Rochin v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1952
  3. Norman Braley v. City of Pontiac, Stanley Helgemo, Sergeant Arthur Rouse and Roland Garcia, OfficersCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1990
  4. Ronald C. Brown v. Hot, Sexy and Safer Productions, Inc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1995
  5. Robinson v. City of SeattleWashington Supreme Court · 1992

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API