Legal Opinion

Walcott v. District Court, Second Judicial District

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided September 23, 1996No. 96SA105PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Scott

We issued a rule pursuant to C.A.R. 21 1 directing the District Court for the City and County of Denver (district court) to show cause why it did not err when it ruled that it lacked authority to permit Brenda Walcott, a non-resident indigent plaintiff, to prosecute her personal injury claim against defendant, Total Petroleum, Inc., without posting a cost bond for security. Because we conclude that the controlling statutes, §§ 13-16-101 to - 103, 6A C.R.S. (1987), do not mandate dismissal where a non-resident plaintiff is financially unable to post a cost bond, 2 wé make the rule absolute.

I

We…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Bertrand v. Board of County Commissioners of Park CountySupreme Court of Colorado · 1994
  2. Jones v. CoxSupreme Court of Colorado · 1992
  3. Van Waters & Rogers, Inc. v. KeelanSupreme Court of Colorado · 1992
  4. Lunsford v. Western States Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Colorado · 1995
  5. People ex rel. Colorado Tax Commission v. PitcherSupreme Court of Colorado · 1914

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Broker House International, Ltd. v. BendelowColorado Court of Appeals · 1998
  2. Hytken v. WakeColorado Court of Appeals · 2002
  3. O'Donnell v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 2008
  4. Harrison v. WilsonColorado Court of Appeals · 2000
  5. Leidal v. BrunellColorado Court of Appeals · 1999

4 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