Legal Opinion

Mile Hi Concrete, Inc. v. Matz

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided November 23, 1992No. 91SC333PublishedCited by 46 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Erickson

This is a negligence and products liability action. We granted certiorari to review the jury instructions given by the district court. The jury returned a verdict for the defendant, and the court of appeals reversed and ordered a new trial. Matz v. Mile Hi Concrete, Inc., 819 P.2d 530 (Colo. App.1991). The jury instructions on the duty of care owed by the petitioner, Mile Hi Concrete, Inc. (Mile Hi), to the respondent, Richard Matz, and the statutory presumption created by section 13-21-403(3), 6A C.R.S. (1987), are the primary issues on appeal. We affirm in part, reverse in part, and return…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Palmer v. AH Robins Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1984
  2. Metropolitan Gas Repair Service, Inc. v. KulikSupreme Court of Colorado · 1980
  3. University of Denver v. WhitlockSupreme Court of Colorado · 1987
  4. Blueflame Gas, Inc. v. Van HooseSupreme Court of Colorado · 1984
  5. Alpine Forwarding Co. v. Pennsylvania R. Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1932

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

3Cited by46 opinions

  1. Kokins v. Teleflex, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2010
  2. Oja v. Howmedica, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1997
  3. Blood v. Qwest Services Corp.Colorado Court of Appeals · 2009
  4. Perlmutter v. United States Gypsum Co.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1993
  5. Squires ex rel. Squires v. GoodwinDistrict Court, D. Colorado · 2011

41 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