Mentzel v. Judicial Dept. of State of Colo.

Decision Date27 July 1989
Docket NumberNo. 88CA0707,88CA0707
Citation778 P.2d 323
PartiesNina A. MENTZEL and Ricky L. Reid, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. The JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT OF the STATE OF COLORADO; Anthony Wernert, The Administrator of the Eighth Judicial District of the State of Colorado; Larimer County Probation Department; John Elliott, The Chief Probation Officer of the Larimer County Probation Department, Defendants-Appellees. . C
CourtColorado Court of Appeals
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
12 cases
  • Springer v. City and County of Denver, No. 99SC543.
    • United States
    • Colorado Supreme Court
    • November 14, 2000
    ...use by the persons who use them. See Kittinger v. City of Colorado Springs, 872 P.2d 1265, 1268 (Colo. App.1993); Mentzel v. Judicial Dep't, 778 P.2d 323, 325 (Colo.App.1989); see also Walton, 968 P.2d at 639 (the physical condition of the building combined with the use of the building crea......
  • Jenks v. Sullivan, 91SC273
    • United States
    • Colorado Supreme Court
    • March 10, 1992
    ...from sovereign immunity, is reached when construing the "dangerous condition" language in section 24-10-103(1). In Mentzel v. Judicial Department, 778 P.2d 323 (Colo.App.1989), the court of appeals interpreted the dangerous condition exception. The court found the language "a physical condi......
  • Ceja v. Lemire
    • United States
    • Colorado Court of Appeals
    • May 4, 2006
    ...argued that the employee was not acting in the course and scope of her employment when the accident occurred); Mentzel v. Judicial Dep't, 778 P.2d 323 (Colo.App.1989)(division held that because vehicle involved in accident was not owned or leased by the public entity, the trial court did no......
  • Jenks v. Sullivan, 90CA0199
    • United States
    • Colorado Court of Appeals
    • February 28, 1991
    ...solely because the design of any facility is inadequate...." Section 24-10-103(1), C.R.S. (1988 Repl.Vol. 10A). In Mentzel v. Judicial Department, 778 P.2d 323 (Colo.App.1989), we held that "acts or omissions in construction and maintenance relate directly to the physical condition of the f......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT