Legal Opinion

Pinkstaff v. Black & Decker (U.S.) Inc.

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided June 29, 2009No. 09SA19PublishedCited by 32 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Martinez

In this C.A.R. 21 proceeding, the Colorado Supreme Court held the trial court abused its discretion in striking an answer brief as a sanction for discovery violations. The court held that striking an answer brief is tantamount to an entry of default judgment, and, in the present case, was unduly harsh and not commensurate with the harm done. The court also held that, although the trial court employed language in an order appearing to hold Baldwin and Black & Decker's attorney in contempt of court, because the trial court states it was not its intent to hold the attorney in contempt, the…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Lee v. Colorado Department of HealthSupreme Court of Colorado · 1986
  2. Kwik Way Stores, Inc. v. CaldwellSupreme Court of Colorado · 1987
  3. Nagy v. District Court of the City & County of DenverSupreme Court of Colorado · 1988
  4. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. BrekkeSupreme Court of Colorado · 2005
  5. Losavio v. DISTRICT COURT IN & FOR TENTH JUD. DIST.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1973

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

3Cited by32 opinions

  1. Warden v. Exempla, Inc.Supreme Court of Colorado · 2012
  2. Bahena v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.Nevada Supreme Court · 2010
  3. Makeen v. HaileyColorado Court of Appeals · 2015
  4. Zueger v. GossColorado Court of Appeals · 2014
  5. v. Frias Drywall, LLCColorado Court of Appeals · 2019

27 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