Legal Opinion

Loonan v. Woodley

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided October 24, 1994No. 94SA310PublishedCited by 41 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Mullarkey

Appellees Loonan, Allen-Davis, Rudnick and McGregor brought this action to challenge the sufficiency of initiative petitions circulated by appellants Woodley and Miller 1 that would require parental notification of an unemancipated minor’s decision to have an abortion. Appellees’ sole contention is that the appellants collected an insufficient number of valid signatures to include the initiative on the November 1994 ballot because the circulators’ affidavits did not include the statement that the circulator “has read and understands the laws governing the circulation of petitions” as required…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Burdick v. TakushiSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
  2. Bickel v. City of BoulderSupreme Court of Colorado · 1994
  3. Committee for Better Health Care for All Colorado Citizens v. MeyerSupreme Court of Colorado · 1992
  4. Watso v. Colorado Department of Social ServicesSupreme Court of Colorado · 1992
  5. In Re Interrogatories Propounded by the Senate Concerning House Bill 1078Supreme Court of Colorado · 1975

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

3Cited by41 opinions

  1. Buckley v. American Constitutional Law Foundation, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1999
  2. Gallivan v. WalkerUtah Supreme Court · 2002
  3. Zaner v. City of BrightonSupreme Court of Colorado · 1996
  4. Espina v. JacksonCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2015
  5. Matter of Title, Ballot Title for No. 62Supreme Court of Colorado · 1998

36 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