COLORADO STATE COUN. OF CARPENTERS v. District Court
Supreme Court of Colorado
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
- McInerney v. City of DenverSupreme Court of Colorado · 1892
- Lucas v. District CourtSupreme Court of Colorado · 1959
- Leonhart v. District CourtSupreme Court of Colorado · 1958
- Prinster v. District Court of Seventh Judicial Dist.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1958
- People ex rel. Dougan v. District CourtSupreme Court of Colorado · 1883
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.