State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Broadnax
Supreme Court of Colorado
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Vollack
State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company (State Farm) appeals from two district court orders in two unrelated actions. In each action, State Farm challenged the constitutionality of section 10-4-708(1.5), 4A C.R.S. (1990 Supp.), which requires binding arbitration of disputes arising under no fault insurance contracts. We simultaneously address both appeals, since the constitutional challenges to section 10-4-708(1.5) in each are substantially the same.1 We affirm the district court’s finding that section 10-4-708(1.5) is constitutional.
State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v.…
Also in this document: Dissent.
2Cases cited34 opinions
- Mathews v. EldridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Wolff v. McDonnellSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Boddie v. ConnecticutSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Logan v. Zimmerman Brush Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
- California Motor Transport Co. v. Trucking UnlimitedSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by35 opinions
- Bd. of Educ. of Carlsbad v. HarrellNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1994
- Scholz v. Metropolitan Pathologists, P.C.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1993
- City & County of Denver v. District Court Ex Rel. City & County of DenverSupreme Court of Colorado · 1997
- Huizar v. Allstate Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1998
- Garhart Ex Rel. Tinsman v. Columbia/HealthOne, L.L.C.Supreme Court of Colorado · 2004
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.