Crowe v. Tull
Supreme Court of Colorado
1Opinion of the Court
MULLARKEY, Chief Justice.
I. Introduction
We exercised -our original jurisdiction under C.A.R. 21 to determine whether a client may sue his or her attorney for violating the Colorado Consumer Protection Act (“CCPA”) by using false or deceptive advertising to induce the client and other members of the public to hire the attorney. Specifically in this case, the petitioner, Richard Crowe, alleges that the respondents, Marc Tull and Azar & Associates (“Azar” or “the Azar firm”), employed a statewide marketing program, primarily through television advertisements, that portrayed the firm as highly…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Bates v. State Bar of ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Bates v. State Bar of ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- In re R. M. J.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
- In Re RMJSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Hall v. WalterSupreme Court of Colorado · 1998
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by62 opinions
- Brodeur v. American Home Assurance Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 2007
- Klinger v. Adams County School District No. 50Supreme Court of Colorado · 2006
- In re Porsche Cars North America, Inc.District Court, S.D. Ohio · 2012
- Van Rees v. Unleaded Software, Inc.Supreme Court of Colorado · 2016
- HealthONE of Denver, Inc. v. UnitedHealth Group Inc.District Court, D. Colorado · 2011
57 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.