Legal Opinion · Dissent

Bath Excavating & Construction Co. v. Wills

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided March 15, 1993No. 91SC522Published

1DissentJustice Vollack

The majority declines to “sua sponte adopt a no-duty fireman’s rule in this case because [it is] convinced that the underlying rationale of cases from other states that have adopted such a rule would not extend to a water department worker.” Maj. op. at 12. I disagree. Rather, I find that the rationales supporting the acceptance and application of a public safety worker rule in other jurisdictions dictate that we adopt and apply such a rule in the present case. Additionally, I find that the majority’s recognition of a duty owed in this case amounts to imposition of liability as a matter of…

2Cases cited35 opinions

  1. Dini v. NaiditchIllinois Supreme Court · 1960
  2. Santangelo v. State of NYNew York Court of Appeals · 1988
  3. Metropolitan Gas Repair Service, Inc. v. KulikSupreme Court of Colorado · 1980
  4. Taco Bell, Inc. v. LannonSupreme Court of Colorado · 1987
  5. University of Denver v. WhitlockSupreme Court of Colorado · 1987

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

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

Powered by the Exa API