Bath Excavating & Construction Co. v. Wills
Supreme Court of Colorado
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
- Dini v. NaiditchIllinois Supreme Court · 1960
- Santangelo v. State of NYNew York Court of Appeals · 1988
- Metropolitan Gas Repair Service, Inc. v. KulikSupreme Court of Colorado · 1980
- Taco Bell, Inc. v. LannonSupreme Court of Colorado · 1987
- University of Denver v. WhitlockSupreme Court of Colorado · 1987
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.