Legal Opinion
Zaner v. City of Brighton
Colorado Court of Appeals
Decided June 30, 1995No. 94CA0139PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Judge NEY.
Plaintiffs, Suzan Zaner and Ray Owens, brought this action to challenge a referendum election held by defendant, City of Brighton, to obtain voter approval for the transfer of Brighton’s electric utility franchise from one utility to another. They maintained that the election was in violation of Colo. Const, art X, § 20, known as “The Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights” (TABOR), an initiated constitutional amendment approved by the electors in the 1992 general election. From a summary judgment entered in favor of Brighton, plaintiffs appeal. We affirm.
On May 4, 1993, the city…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Bickel v. City of BoulderSupreme Court of Colorado · 1994
- Danielson v. Castle Meadows, Inc.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1990
- Central Hanover B. & T. Co. v. Commissioner of Int. Rev.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1947
- Margolis v. District Court in & for the County of ArapahoeSupreme Court of Colorado · 1981
- In Re Interrogatories Propounded by the Senate Concerning House Bill 1078Supreme Court of Colorado · 1975
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Zaner v. City of BrightonSupreme Court of Colorado · 1996
- City of Wheat Ridge v. CervenySupreme Court of Colorado · 1996
- Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains Services, Corp. v. OwensCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2002
- Beinor v. Industrial Claim Appeals OfficeColorado Court of Appeals · 2011
- Wells v. Lodge Properties, Inc.Colorado Court of Appeals · 1998
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.