Whether the court of appeals erred by holding as a matter of first impression that Colorado’s Common Interest Ownership Act (“CCIOA”) permits a developer-declarant to reserve the power to veto unit owner votes to amend common interest community declarations.
Whether the court of appeals erred in holding that Colorado’s Consumer Protection Act (“CCPA”) claims are subject to pre-dispute mandatory arbitration provisions where this Court previously held, “We leave open the question of whether CCPA claims might be deemed non-arbitrable,” Ingold v. AIMCO/Bluffs, LLC Apartments, 159 P.3d 116, 122 n.5 (Colo. 2007).
Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC is proud to announce that Best Lawyers® has recognized…
Last Friday, four members of the Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell team traded briefs, depositions,…
Fourteen years ago, we cautioned Colorado homeowners associations against a “ready, fire, aim” approach to…
Editor's Note: Wadsworth Revisited In August 2024, following the Colorado Court of Appeals' decision in…
For decades, Colorado law has recognized an important distinction between the duty to defend and…
The Colorado Court of Appeals recently affirmed a trial court’s award of more than $241,000…
