Legal Opinion

People v. One 1979 Volkswagen

Colorado Court of Appeals

Decided March 2, 1989No. 87CA1742PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MARQUEZ, Judge.

Defendant Katherine Baker appeals from the summary judgment which forfeited her interest in her Volkswagen vehicle because it had been used to aid or abet a Class I public nuisance. We affirm.

I

Defendant first argues that summary judgment was improper because contested issues of fact existed as to whether her car had been used to aid or abet a public nuisance. We disagree.

Summary judgment is proper if there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and if the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law. C.R.C.P. 56(c). When the party moving for summary judgment…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Heller v. First National Bank of Denver, N.A.Colorado Court of Appeals · 1982
  2. People v. LOT 23Supreme Court of Colorado · 1987
  3. People v. McBeathColorado Court of Appeals · 1985
  4. Buttermore v. Firestone Tire and Rubber Co.Colorado Court of Appeals · 1986

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. People v. One 1988 Mazda 323, VIN JM1BF232XJ0131664Colorado Court of Appeals · 1993
  2. People v. CobbColorado Court of Appeals · 1996
  3. People v. WilsonColorado Court of Appeals · 1992
  4. State v. One 1982 Gray Nissan Automobile, No. Cr14-432876a (Aug. 11, 1998)Connecticut Superior Court · 1998

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API