Legal Opinion
Peterson v. Kester
Colorado Court of Appeals
Decided December 14, 1989No. 88CA0937PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Judge DUBOFSKY.
The issue in this case is whether a workmen’s compensation carrier seeking to enforce its statutory right of subrogation is subject to the bar against tort recovery for direct benefits contained in the Colorado Auto Accident Reparations Act, § 10-4-701, et seq., C.R.S. (1987 Repl. Vol. 4A) (the No-Fault Act). The district court entered summary judgment against the carrier, CNA Insurance Companies (CNA), finding that the No-Fault Act bars the carrier’s subrogation claim. We affirm.
The relevant facts are undisputed. Thomas L. Peterson was injured in an automobile…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Cingoranelli v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1983
- Great American Insurance v. QueenMichigan Supreme Court · 1980
- Marquez v. Prudential Property & Casualty Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1980
- Vespaziani v. InsanaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
- Metropolitan Transit Commission v. Bachman'sSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1981
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Tate v. Industrial Claim Appeals OfficeSupreme Court of Colorado · 1991
- Porter v. Castle Rock Ford Lincoln Mercury, Inc.Colorado Court of Appeals · 1995
- People v. in the Interest of T.R.Colorado Court of Appeals · 1993
- United Security Insurance Co. v. SciarrotaColorado Court of Appeals · 1994
- Rocky Mountain General v. SimonColorado Court of Appeals · 1992
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.