Legal Opinion · Dissent

COLORADO STATE COUN. OF CARPENTERS v. District Court

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided May 25, 1964No. 21207Published

1DissentJustice Hall

I dissent.

Procedurally, I find nothing in the Constitution, our rules or decisions which sanctions or warrants the entertaining of this matter as an original proceeding.

Petitioners label the proceeding as:

“ORIGINAL PROCEEDING UNDER RULE 106 (4) and RULE 116 IN NATURE OF PROHIBITION.”

In Lucas v. District Court, 140 Colo. 510, 345 P.2d 1084, this court stated:

“Although the case purports to arise under Rule 106, *58it is our view that this rule does not apply to original proceedings. * * *.”

Rule 116, providing for original proceedings in the Supreme Court, expressly provides:

“ * * * Belief in the…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. McInerney v. City of DenverSupreme Court of Colorado · 1892
  2. Lucas v. District CourtSupreme Court of Colorado · 1959
  3. Leonhart v. District CourtSupreme Court of Colorado · 1958
  4. Prinster v. District Court of Seventh Judicial Dist.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1958
  5. People ex rel. Dougan v. District CourtSupreme Court of Colorado · 1883

10 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