Legal Opinion · Dissent

Sung v. McCullough

Colorado Court of Appeals

Decided June 24, 1982No. 81CA0590Published

1DissentSternberg, Judge

I respectfully dissent.

Application of the doctrine of waiver requires a finding that there was an intentional relinquishment of a known right. Ewing v. Colorado Farm Mutual Casualty Co., 133 Colo. 447, 296 P.2d 1040 (1956). See also Shoemaker v. Mountain States Telephone & Telegraph Co., 38 Colo.App. 321, 559 P.2d 721 (1976). Intent is a question of fact. Williams v. Gulick, 170 Colo. 347, 461 P.2d 211 (1969). Thus, the majority begs the question in addressing waiver as a matter of law.

The majority opinion substitutes its own findings of fact for that of the trial court on the contested issue…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Page v. ClarkSupreme Court of Colorado · 1979
  2. Radiology Professional Corp. v. Trinidad Area Health Ass'nSupreme Court of Colorado · 1978
  3. Linley v. HansonSupreme Court of Colorado · 1970
  4. Peterson v. Ground Water CommissionSupreme Court of Colorado · 1978
  5. Ewing v. Colorado Farm Mutual Casualty Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1956

3 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