Legal Opinion
Purcell v. Colorado Division of Gaming
Colorado Court of Appeals
Decided May 2, 1996No. 95CA1250PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Judge NEY.
Plaintiff, Robert E. Purcell, appeals the trial court’s dismissal of his complaint against defendant, Colorado Division of Gaming (Division). We affirm.
In 1993, plaintiff petitioned the Division for a determination whether a jackpot feature he sought to introduce was permitted under the statutory definition of “blackjack” set forth in § 12-47.1-103(4), C.R.S. (1991 Repl.Vol. 5B). The Division held that the jackpot feature was not within the statutory definition of “blackjack.”
Plaintiff then presented his request to the Colorado Limited Gaming Control Commission…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- People v. District Court, Second Judicial DistrictSupreme Court of Colorado · 1986
- Horrell v. Department of AdministrationSupreme Court of Colorado · 1993
- Collopy v. Wildlife Commission, Department of Natural ResourcesSupreme Court of Colorado · 1981
- Moya v. Colorado Ltd. Gaming Control CommissionColorado Court of Appeals · 1994
- Leete v. Colorado Board of Medical ExaminersColorado Court of Appeals · 1991
3Cited by4 opinions
- Barry v. Bally Gaming, Inc.Colorado Court of Appeals · 2013
- Board of County Commissioners v. City of Black HawkColorado Court of Appeals · 2012
- Envirotest Systems, Corp. v. Colorado Department of RevenueSupreme Court of Colorado · 2005
- Purcell v. Colorado Division of GamingColorado Court of Appeals · 1996