Legal Opinion

State, Motor Vehicle Div. v. Dayhoff

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided March 31, 1980No. 79SC114, 79SC132PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Erickson

We granted certiorari in these consolidated cases to reconcile conflicting holdings of two departments of the court of appeals. See Dayhoff v. Colorado Motor Vehicle Division, 42 Colo. App. 91, 595 P.2d 1051 (1979); McCoy v. Colorado Motor Vehicle Division, 42 Colo. App. 267, 595 P.2d 706 (1979). The issue before both departments was whether the driver’s license revocation provision of the implied consent law, section 42-4-1202(3)(e), C.R.S. 1973, applies to the operator of a motor vehicle who is not driving on a public highway. We hold that the provisions do not apply when the operator is…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Burton v. City & County of DenverSupreme Court of Colorado · 1936
  2. Weber v. OrrCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1969
  3. Weather Engineering & Manufacturing, Inc. v. Pinon Springs Condominiums, Inc.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1977
  4. Air Pollution Control Commission v. DISTRICT COURT, ETC.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1977
  5. Clark v. BunnellSupreme Court of Colorado · 1970

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

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Moran v. CarlstromSupreme Court of Colorado · 1989
  2. Rettig v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1994
  3. Disciplinary Proceedings Regarding the License to Practice Dentistry of Maul v. State Board of Dental ExaminersSupreme Court of Colorado · 1983
  4. People v. LucianoSupreme Court of Colorado · 1983
  5. Fish v. CharnesSupreme Court of Colorado · 1982

10 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