City of Colorado Springs v. Conners

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that legislative intent of Colorado Civil Rights Act was to provide noncompensatory and equitable relief
• noting that exhaustion of administrative remedies is a condition precedent under Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-34- 306(14)
• holding that although the form of relief alone does not govern the categorization of a claim as a tort or other type of action, a trial court must consider the nature of the relief sought to determine whether a particular claim lies in tort or could lie in tort
• determining that the relief available under the pre-2015 CADA is noncompensatory and stating that the United States Supreme Court has held that “similar relief under civil rights statutes is non-compensatory in nature”
• determining that the relief available under the pre-2015 CADA is noncompensatory and stating that the United States Supreme Court has held that “similar relief under civil rights statutes is non-compensatory in nature”
• noting that some torts, including nuisance, may involve equitable forms of relief

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).