Legal Opinion · Dissent

Dunlap v. Colorado Springs Cablevision, Inc.

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided April 13, 1992No. 90SC386Published

1DissentJustice Vollack

The majority holds that consumers of Colorado Springs Cablevision, Inc. (Cablevision), have standing to bring an action for damages under the Unfair Practices Act (the Act), §§ 6-2-101 to -117, 2 C.R.S. (1973 & 1991 Supp.). The majority bases its holding on the premise that consumers may suffer injuries that the Unfair Practices Act is designed to prevent. I disagree. The Unfair Practices Act proscribes sales below cost and discriminatory sales when done with the intent to injure or destroy competitors.1 §§ 6-2-103(1), 6-2-105(1), 2 C.R.S. (1973). As such, consumers can never be appropriate…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Associated General Contractors of California, Inc. v. California State Council of CarpentersSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  2. Cargill, Inc. v. Monfort of Colorado, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
  3. California v. ARC America Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1989
  4. Wimberly v. EttenbergSupreme Court of Colorado · 1977
  5. Farmers Group, Inc. v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Colorado · 1991

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

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

Powered by the Exa API