Legal Opinion
Thyssenkrupp Safway, Inc. v. Hyland Hills Parks & Recreation District
Colorado Court of Appeals
Decided December 8, 2011No. 10CA2349PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Judge CASEBOLT.
In this action for breach of contract based on an indemnity provision, plaintiff, Thyssen-krupp Safway, Inc. (Safway), appeals the judgment in favor of defendant, Hyland Hills Parks and Recreation District (Hyland Hills). The trial court granted a directed verdict in favor of Hyland Hills at the end of trial, finding, among other things, that Safway failed to prove it had complied with section 24-91-103.6(4), C.R.S. 2011-a statute dealing with governmental budgeting matters. We affirm.
L. Facts
Hyland Hills, a quasi-municipal corporation and political subdivision…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- State v. NietoSupreme Court of Colorado · 2000
- Town of Alma v. AZCO Construction, Inc.Supreme Court of Colorado · 2000
- People v. CooperSupreme Court of Colorado · 2001
- Rush Creek Solutions, Inc. v. Ute Mountain Ute TribeColorado Court of Appeals · 2004
- Frohlick Crane Service, Inc. v. MacKSupreme Court of Colorado · 1973
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Hanson-Metayer v. Hanson-MetayerSupreme Court of Vermont · 2013
- Jordan v. Safeco Insurance Co. of AmericaColorado Court of Appeals · 2013
- Premier Members Federal Credit Union v. BlockColorado Court of Appeals · 2013
- Wisdom Works Counseling Services, P.C. v. Colorado Department of CorrectionsColorado Court of Appeals · 2015
- v. N.T.BColorado Court of Appeals · 2019
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.