Legal Opinion
Condo v. Conners
Supreme Court of Colorado
Decided December 19, 2011No. 10SC703PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Bender
I. Introduction
In this appeal, we review the court of appeals' determination that Thomas Banner's assignment of his voting rights and right to receive distributions to Elizabeth Condo ("the Banner assignment") was ineffective because it violated the anti-assignment clause in the Hut at Avon, LLC's ("the Hut Group") operating agreement. Condo v. Conners, 271 P.3d 524, 2010 WL 2105926 (Colo.App.2010).
Condo brought a tort action against the other members of the Hut Group, Thomas Conners and George Roberts, and the attorney who allegedly assisted them in purchasing Banner's membership interest in…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Thompson v. Maryland Casualty Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 2004
- Travertine Corp. v. Lexington-SilverwoodSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2004
- Parrish Chiropractic Centers, P.C. v. Progressive Casualty Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1994
- Rumbin v. Utica Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2000
- Bank of America, N.A., Creditor-Appellant v. Alex D. Moglia, Trustee-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2003
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Bellman v. I3Carbon, LLCCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2014
- Christensen v. WilsonColorado Court of Appeals · 2012
- Allstate Insurance Co. v. Medical Lien Management, Inc.Supreme Court of Colorado · 2015
- Broadband, Inc. v. Banning Lewis Ranch Metropolitan District No. 1Colorado Court of Appeals · 2018
- Gordon Kleyle v. Myrna DeograciasCourt of Appeals of Mississippi · 2016
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.