Legal Opinion

Houser v. CenturyLink

Colorado Court of Appeals

Decided August 22, 2024No. 23CA1214PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

SUMMARY

August 22, 2024

2024COA96

No. 23CA1214, Houser v. CenturyLink — Civil Procedure —

Signing of Pleadings — Obligations of Parties and Attorneys —

Borrowing Plausibility — Reasonable Inquiry — Pleading

Grounded in Fact

In this case, a division of the court of appeals considers, as a

matter of first impression in Colorado, whether an attorney’s

inquiry is objectively reasonable under C.R.C.P. 11(a) if the attorney

copies confidential witnesses’ factual statements from a complaint

in another case without speaking to the confidential witnesses to

confirm their statements. After reviewing federal cases…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
  2. Cooter & Gell v. Hartmarx Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1990
  3. Pavelic & LeFlore v. Marvel Entertainment Group, Div. of Cadence Industries Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1990
  4. City of Pontiac Policemen's & Firemen's Retirement System v. UBS AGCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2014
  5. In Re Morgan Stanley Information Fund SecuritiesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2010

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. CenturyLink, Inc.; Glen F. Post, III; R. Stewart Ewing, Jr.; David D. Cole; William A. Owens; Martha H. Bejar; Virginia Boulet; Peter C. Brown; W. Bruce Hanks; Jeffrey K. Storey; Steven T. Clontz; Mary L. Landrieu; Gregory J. McCray; Harvey P. Perry; Michael J. Roberts; Laurie A. Siegel; and Sunit S. Patel v. Dean HouserSupreme Court of Colorado · 2026

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

Powered by the Exa API