Roberts v. City of Boulder, 27989
| Decision Date | 29 January 1979 |
| Docket Number | No. 27989,27989 |
| Citation | 589 P.2d 934,197 Colo. 97 |
| Parties | Catherine ROBERTS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF BOULDER, a Colorado Municipal Corporation, and the Board of Regents ofthe University of Colorado, a Body Corporate, Defendants-Appellees. |
| Court | Colorado Supreme Court |
Engdahl & Renzo, P. C., Anthony F. Renzo, Denver, for plaintiff-appellant.
Weller, Friedrich, Hickisch & Hazlitt, Geoffrey S. Race, Denver, for Bd. of Regents.
Yegge, Hall & Evans, David R. Brougham, Denver, for the City of Boulder.
This appeal was taken after motions to dismiss and for summary judgment were granted by the district court. The appellant was the plaintiff in the district court and filed a complaint asserting a claim for negligence against both the City of Boulder and the Board of Regents of the University of Colorado. The plaintiff asserts that the negligence of the defendants was the proximate cause of the injuries which she suffered while riding a bicycle on a bicycle path which was owned, constructed, and maintained by the defendants.
Suit was filed nearly nine months after the injuries were incurred, and no notice was filed in compliance with the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act. Section 24-10-109, C.R.S. 1973. The plaintiff asserts that her failure to comply with the ninety-day notice provisions of the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act does not bar her prosecution of a claim for relief against the defendants, because the defendants purchased liability insurance and thereby waived the the notice provisions of the statutes. Alternatively, she has asserted that the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act is unconstitutional.
The claims which are now before us have been fully addressed in Fritz v. Regents of the University of Colorado et al., Colo., 586 P.2d 23 (1978); Kristensen v. Jones, Colo., 575 P.2d 854 (1978); and Jones v. Kristensen, 38 Colo.App. 513, 563 P.2d 959 (1977). Since the failure to file the written notice is a complete defense to any action brought by an injured party against those that fall within the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act, the district court properly granted the motions to dismiss and for summary judgment. Antonopoulos v. Town of Telluride, 187 Colo. 392, 532 P.2d 346 (1975).
Accordingly, we affirm the district court.
CARRIGAN, J., does not participate.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State Personnel Bd. v. Lloyd
...comply with the notice of claim provision is a complete defense to any action subject to section 24-10-109. Roberts v. City of Boulder, 197 Colo. 97, 589 P.2d 934 (1979). Lloyd claims that the notice of claim provision of the Governmental Immunity Act does not apply to claims based on the w......
-
Dominguez v. Babcock
...1981, notice of claims was untimely as to the August 25, 1980, document thereby barring any claim based thereon. Roberts v. City of Boulder, 197 Colo. 97, 589 P.2d 934 (1979). However, notice was timely filed as to the September 4, 1980 document, because plaintiff did not learn of its exist......
-
Deason v. Lewis, 84CA0595
...found that plaintiff's action was barred by his failure to comply with § 24-10-109, C.R.S. (1982 Repl. Vol. 10). See Roberts v. Boulder, 197 Colo. 97, 589 P.2d 934 (1979). Plaintiff admits that notice was not filed within 180 days of discovery of his cause of action, but argues that the not......
-
Chacon v. Zahorka
...is a complete defense of any action brought by any injured party against those who fall within this article. Roberts v. City of Boulder, 197 Colo. 97, 589 P.2d 934 (1979). Plaintiffs admit no notice was ever given. They assert, however, their action is not subject to the notice provisions o......
-
Chapter 2 - § 2.4 • REQUIREMENTS OF A VALID GUILTY PLEA
...Draft, 1978) '[does not] require that a defendant be informed of the possible future application of habitual offender laws.'" Heinz, 589 P.2d at 934. Standard 14-1.4, as approved by the ABA House of Delegates in 1997, now provides in part that "(c) Before accepting a plea of guilty or nolo ......
-
The Colorado Governmental Immuntity Act
...of the University of Colorado, 586 P.2d 23 (Colo. 1978); Gray v. RTD, 8 Colo. Lawyer 2012 (Oct. 1979). 46. Roberts v. City of Boulder, 589 P.2d 934 (Colo. 1979). 47. 187 Colo. 392, 532 P.2d 346 (1975). 48. Id. The court stated: A disabled person is relieved from the statutory duty of giving......