Legal Opinion
Vigil v. Franklin
Supreme Court of Colorado
Decided November 30, 2004No. 03SC479PublishedCited by 185 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RICE, Justice.
Petitioner James Vigil seeks review of the court of appeals' decision that the trial court's grant of summary judgment was proper because the common law open and obvious danger doctrine survived enactment of Colorado's premises liability statute.1 We reverse.
Upon review, we find that the express, unambiguous language of the statute evidences the General Assembly's intent to establish a comprehensive and exclusive specification of the duties landowners owe to those injured on their property. Accordingly, common law landowner duties do not survive its enactment. In addition,…
2Cases cited37 opinions
- Metropolitan Gas Repair Service, Inc. v. KulikSupreme Court of Colorado · 1980
- Taco Bell, Inc. v. LannonSupreme Court of Colorado · 1987
- Jones v. Three Rivers Management Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
- Springer v. City & County of DenverSupreme Court of Colorado · 2000
- Vaughan v. McMinnSupreme Court of Colorado · 1997
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by185 opinions
- Colorado Water Conservation Board v. Upper Gunnison River Water Conservancy DistrictSupreme Court of Colorado · 2005
- Corder v. Lewis Palmer School District No. 38Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2009
- Lombard v. Colorado Outdoor Education Center, Inc.Supreme Court of Colorado · 2008
- Argus Real Estate, Inc. v. E-470 Public Highway AuthoritySupreme Court of Colorado · 2005
- Alpine Bank v. HubbellCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2009
180 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.