Abromeit v. Denver Career Service Board

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that personnel rule amendment eliminating appeal right for 10 classification decisions was intended to apply retroactively to claims that were pending on its effective date
• concluding that the district court properly declined to address a party’s equitable estoppel claim in the C.R.C.P. 106 28 action where that claim wasn’t raised in the administrative proceedings
• noting that arguments not raised in administrative proceedings are not preserved for appellate review
• interpretation of personnel rules by the agency charged with enforcement of those rules is generally entitled to great deference
• “[T]he district court could only address, in C.R.C.P. 106 proceedings, issues that were properly presented for determination by the administrative agency . . . .”
• “[T]he district court could only address, in C.R.C.P. 106 proceedings, issues that were properly presented for determination by the administrative agency . . . .”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).