Legal Opinion

Suss Pontiac-GMC, Inc. v. Boddicker

Colorado Court of Appeals

Decided November 26, 2008No. 07CA0263PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Judge RUSSELL.

Defendant, Richard A. Boddicker, appeals from the trial court's summary judgment in favor of plaintiff, Suss Pontiac-GMC, Inc. We affirm and remand with directions.

I. Background

Suss leased real estate from Boddicker under a contract that contained a purchase option. The contract stated that Suss could exercise the option by notifying Boddicker of its intent to buy the property. The contract also stated that, if Suss did not exercise the option by June 1, 2006, the rental provisions would automatically renew for five years.

The contract contained the following notice…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Jacob & Youngs, Inc. v. KentNew York Court of Appeals · 1921
  2. Cyprus Amax Minerals Co. v. Lexington Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 2003
  3. Compass Insurance Co. v. City of LittletonSupreme Court of Colorado · 1999
  4. HealthONE v. Rodriguez ex rel. RodriguezSupreme Court of Colorado · 2002
  5. Hoang v. Assurance Co. of AmericaSupreme Court of Colorado · 2007

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. International Network, Inc. v. WoodardColorado Court of Appeals · 2017
  2. Digital Satellite Connections v. Dish NetworkCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2018

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API