DLR Online Special Features

Please visit here for a list of special feature editions of the DLR Online.


Events & Announcements

Mar. 10, 2019 - The Denver Law Review will soon be accepting submissions for the 2019 Emerging Scholar Award. For details on the award including eligibility, award information, and submission instructions, please review this document. We look forward to reviewing all submissions!


Jan. 9, 2019 - The Denver Law Review is pleased to open registration for our 2019 Symposium, Driven by Data: Empirical Studies in Civil Litigation and Health Law. We have a top-class list of speakers for this year's symposium and we look forward to seeing you there! Register by following this link.


Apr. 4, 2018 - The Denver Law Review is currently accepting submissions for its Recent Developments in the Tenth Circuit issue. For details on the issue and submission instructions, please review this document. We look forward to reviewing all submissions!


Subscriptions and Submissions

For information on how to subscribe to the Denver Law Review, please click here.

For the guidelines on how to submit an article to the Denver Law Review, please click here.

Monday
Mar142011

WHAT IS YOUR RELATIONSHIP STATUS? Searching for clarity in the legal relationship between child and guardian ad litem.

By Jason Carrithers and Jeffrey C. Koy

Who is your client, and what are your duties and obligations to your client? For most attorneys, these questions are easily answered. Most attorneys know who their client is, and the client knows their attorney and what their duties are to them. An attorney's duties to her client are well defined by the Colorado Rules of Professional Conduct (“RPC”). Most of the time, there is also a specific agreement outlining the scope of representation. The question of whether an attorney-client relationship exists is almost never an issue.

Click to read more ...

Monday
Mar142011

The Third Generation of Bail Reform 

Timothy R. Schnacke, Claire M.B. Brooker, Michael R. Jones

Even if you aren’t a criminal lawyer, you may have noticed that something significant is happening in the criminal legal field. The failure last year of Proposition 102, which was proposed by for-profit bail bondsmen in Colorado to force judges to add secured money to the bail bonds of nearly all criminal defendants, was perhaps the first outward sign that jurisdictions in this state were considering, and in some cases implementing, improvements to the way our courts administer bail. In fact, jurisdictions across the country are currently doing the same thing, in a wave of legislation, policy changes, and various projects aimed at improving pretrial justice.

Click to read more ...

Monday
Mar142011

[(Clean Air + Clean Jobs + Statute of First Impression)] + [(Natural Gas + Green Coal) x (Northeast Colorado + Northwest Colorado)] ÷ (60 witnesses + 40 Attorneys) = Appeal

Russell P. Rowe, Esq., RoweLaw LLC,

William R. Rowe, Esq., RoweLaw LLC,

and Wendy M. Moser, Esq., Wendy M. Moser LLC

Counsel for Gas Intervenors in CO PUC Case 10M-245E

Implementing CO’s Clean Air—Clean Jobs Act for Public Service Company of Colorado

The Colorado legislature set in motion a legal tsunami with the bi-partisan passage of House Bill 10-1365, the Colorado “Clean Air--Clean Jobs Act.”[1] This landmark legislation recognized that Colorado was in violation of, and would continue to violate, federal air quality standards largely due to noxious emissions from the many aging coal-fired power plants used to generate electricity along Colorado’s Front Range.

Click to read more ...

Monday
Mar142011

Reimagining the Civil Process

Corina Gerety

“One might not think of civil procedure as a likely province for dreamers.”[1] These are the words of Professor Stephen Subrin as he remarked on the visionary enterprise of creating a litigation process that can truly provide substantive justice. Professor Glenn Koppel expressed a similar sentiment when he stated “the time for stirring procedural visions--for imagining a new procedural paradigm that meets today’s challenges to the American civil justice system--is over only if we think it is.”[2] This note advocates for a more innovative and expansive approach to rulemaking in state courts, and briefly discusses one such effort in Colorado.

Click to read more ...

Monday
Mar142011

The Data Retention Knot: Privacy Interests, Law Enforcement Interests, and Business Interests

FEATURED PRACTITIONER ARTICLE

Andy Holleman[1]

Introduction

Policy makers, law enforcement, and members of Congress are currently involved in two separate discussions about data retention. First, policy makers and privacy advocates advance the basic privacy maxim that businesses should generally retain less data and retain their data for shorter periods. At the same time, Congress is examining whether those involved in the provision of Internet services should be obligated to retain for defined periods...

Click to read more ...

Friday
Mar112011

Forthcoming: May states enact legislation to prevent the employment of unauthorized workers? Or are work authorization laws preempted by federal law?

Matthew C. Arentsen

In Chamber of Commerce v. Edmondson, decided in February 2010, the Tenth Circuit responded to these questions by invalidating two sections, while upholding one section of the Oklahoma Taxpayer and Citizen Protection Act (“Oklahoma Act”). The Oklahoma Act’s purpose is to regulate illegal immigration. The Tenth Circuit held that Section 7(C) was expressly preempted by the Immigration Reform and Control Act (“IRCA”) and that Section 9 was impliedly preempted by IRCA. IRCA, enacted by Congress in 1986, prohibits the employment of illegal aliens. The Tenth Circuit, however, reversed the district court and found that Section 7(B) was not impliedly preempted by IRCA because mandating E-Verify, an internet-based work authorization program, did not stand as obstacle to Congress’s goals in enacting IRCA.

Click to read more ...

Wednesday
Feb162011

Deference and Legislative Intent

Dan Domenico

Colorado courts and others (including the Office of the Attorney General, in which I practice) often declare that the goal of statutory interpretation is to divine and implement the intent of the legislature.[1] As an outgrowth of the earliest common law it has a peerless pedigree.[2] But despite its origins and historical rationale, today it has become something of an incantation that, whatever kernel of truth it holds at its center, can be more troublesome than helpful in interpreting and applying modern statutes. There are a number of reasons for this.

Click to read more ...

Wednesday
Jan192011

Harsh and Unreasonable Evidentiary Standards in Dillon v. Mountain Coal Company, L.L.C.

Hannah Misner

In March 1999, Jared Dillon injured his neck and back while working for Mountain Coal Company, L.L.C. (“Mountain Coal”) when the cover on a mining machine fell and struck him at West Elk Mine.[1] After trying to return to work twice and experiencing great pain, he was told that he could not come back to work until he had no medical restrictions. Because of his injury, he did not return to work for several months, and received his termination letter on January 24, 2000.

Click to read more ...

Friday
Apr302010

Ramsey Winch, Inc. v. Henry

Laura Monty

Despite opposition from employers and business property owners alike, the Tenth Circuit recently upheld “take your guns to work” laws.  In Ramsey Winch Inc. v. Henry, a number of Oklahoma businesses, initially led by Whirlpool Corporation, challenged the constitutionality of Oklahoma laws that prohibit employers from banning firearms located in locked vehicles on company property.

Click to read more ...

Tuesday
Mar302010

Hennagir v. Utah Department of Corrections and an Employer’s Ability to Circumvent the ADA 

By J. Matthew Soper

In Hennagir v. Utah Department of Corrections the Tenth Circuit addressed whether “a job function that is rarely required in the normal course of an employee’s duties may nonetheless be an essential job function under the ADA.”  The issue arose after a grant of summary judgment in favor of the defendant.  Barbara Hennagir brought an action against the Utah State department of corrections (DOC), alleging a violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), in connection with DOC’s refusal to allow her to continue in her position without completing the required physical safety training.

Click to read more ...