Tenth Circuit· 10/14/2010

Kokins v. Teleflex, Inc.

Citations

621 F.3d 1290
2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 21168
2010 WL 4009732

How courts have described this case

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

holding that 2003 amendment adding Colo. Rev. Stat. §13-21-403(4) effectively overruled Mile Hi Concrete, Inc. insofar as it concerned instructing jury on rebuttable presumption
federal courts must be guided by “recent decisions of the state’s highest court” when interpreting state law
“[A] trial court is obligated to correctly instruct the jury on the law applicable to the case.” (quotation omitted)
“When a panel of this Court has rendered a decision interpreting state law, that interpretation is binding on district courts in this circuit.” (quotation cleaned up)
“[W]hen a panel of this Court has rendered a decision interpreting state law, that interpretation is binding on district courts in this circuit, and on subsequent panels of this Court, unless an intervening decision of the state’s highest court has resolved the issue.” (alteration in original
“‘[W]hen a panel of [the Tenth Circuit] has rendered a decision interpreting state law, that interpretation is binding on district courts in this circuit, and on subsequent panels of [the Tenth Doc. 125 at 2 (Pl.’s Mot. to Certify Questions of Law to Kan. Sup. Ct.

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Briscoe, Tymkovich, Holmes

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

40 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

30 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.