Legal Opinion
Woodsmall v. Regional Transportation District
Supreme Court of Colorado
Decided November 19, 1990No. 89SA195PublishedCited by 104 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Quinn
The plaintiff-appellants, Carol Woodsmall and Hughie Bennett, appeal the district court’s dismissal of their personal injury claims against the Regional Transportation District (RTD) due to their failure to comply with the notice provisions of section 24-10-109 of the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act, §§ 24-10-101 to 120, 10A C.R.S. (1988 & 1990 Supp.). In dismissing the case, the district court ruled when subsection (1) of section 24-10-109 was amended in 1986 to state that “compliance” with the notice provisions of the Governmental Immunity Act shall be a jurisdictional prerequisite to…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- People v. GuentherSupreme Court of Colorado · 1987
- Colorado Common Cause v. MeyerSupreme Court of Colorado · 1988
- Griffin v. SW Devanney & Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1989
- Fritz v. Regents of the University of ColoradoSupreme Court of Colorado · 1978
- Kern v. GebhardtSupreme Court of Colorado · 1987
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by104 opinions
- Trinity Broadcasting of Denver, Inc. v. City of WestminsterSupreme Court of Colorado · 1993
- Jones v. CoxSupreme Court of Colorado · 1992
- Regional Transportation District v. LopezSupreme Court of Colorado · 1996
- Allstate Insurance Co. v. ParfreySupreme Court of Colorado · 1992
- Van Waters & Rogers, Inc. v. KeelanSupreme Court of Colorado · 1992
99 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.