The Court didn't have a duty...
The plaintiff argued to the Court of Appeals that it did not understand the order
dropping parties to operate as a dismissal until the court ruled a year later on the
defendants' summary judgment motions. The district court did not have a duty to explain
the legal effect of dropping parties under C.R.C.P. 21. It is the responsibility of parties'
counsel to recognize the import of a court's decision and to argue the relevant legal
issues to the court. King v. W. R. Hall Transportation and Storage Co., 641 P.2d 916 (Colo. 01/18/1982)
PHONE #s: 970-330-3883/720-203-5142 c.
For mailing: Excellence Unlimited, 2830 27th St. Ln. #B115, Greeley , CO 80634
BEAR'S WEB PAGES: