More v. Johnson

38 Citing cases

  1. In re Mullins

    BAP CO-20-046 (B.A.P. 10th Cir. Jun. 30, 2021)

    Nelson v. Elway, 908 P.2d 102, 106 (Colo. 1995); Jet Courier Serv., Inc. v. Mulei, 771 P.2d 486, 502 (Colo. 1989); More v. Johnson, 568 P.2d 437, 440 (Colo. 1977); Lockwood Grader Corp. v. Bockhaus, 270 P.2d 193, 196 (Colo. 1954).Nelson v. Elway, 908 P.2d at 106.

  2. Trans-W., Inc. v. Mullins (In re Mullins)

    BAP No. CO-20-046 (B.A.P. 10th Cir. Jun. 30, 2021)

    Nelson v. Elway, 908 P.2d 102, 106 (Colo. 1995); Jet Courier Serv., Inc. v. Mulei, 771 P.2d 486, 502 (Colo. 1989); More v. Johnson, 568 P.2d 437, 440 (Colo. 1977); Lockwood Grader Corp. v. Bockhaus, 270 P.2d 193, 196 (Colo. 1954). Nelson v. Elway, 908 P.2d at 106.

  3. Brody v. Bruner

    No. 23-1102 (10th Cir. May. 1, 2024)   Cited 1 times

    Further, "silent knowledge of an unlawful act is insufficient to establish the requisite agreement." More v. Johnson, 568 P.2d 437, 440 (Colo. 1977).

  4. U.S. v. Goodrich Farms Partnership

    947 F.2d 906 (10th Cir. 1991)   Cited 3 times

    Put simply, the dispute is whether the language of the deed conveys the parcels to the thread of the stream or to the bank only. It has been the settled law of Colorado (whose law governs the decision in this case) since 1897 that if a nonnavigable stream, such as a ditch, is described as the boundary or a monument in a deed conveying land bordered by that non-navigable stream, the conveyance includes the stream's bed to its center. More v. Johnson, 193 Colo. 489, 568 P.2d 437, 439 (1977); Hanlon v. Hobson, 24 Colo. 284, 51 P. 433 (1897). Under Colorado law, "the intention of the parties to a conveyance is open to interpretation only when the words used are ambiguous."

  5. Powell Products, Inc. v. Marks

    948 F. Supp. 1469 (D. Colo. 1996)   Cited 84 times
    Holding conversion claim not entirely preempted because plaintiff also sought recovery of physical items stolen

    Id. More v. Johnson, 193 Colo. 489, 494, 568 P.2d 437, 440 (1977) ("[S]ilent knowledge of an unlawful act is insufficient to establish the requisite agreement."). The purpose of the conspiracy must either be unlawful or lawful and accomplished by unlawful means.

  6. Jet Courier v. Mulei

    771 P.2d 486 (Colo. 1989)   Cited 160 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Determining whether employer's workers had been "enticed away" to a competing business did not depend upon their status as "independent contractors"

    "[T]here must be: (1) two or more persons, and for this purpose a corporation is a person; (2) an object to be accomplished; (3) a meeting of the minds on the object or course of action; (4) one or more unlawful overt acts; and (5) damages as the proximate result thereof." More v. Johnson, 193 Colo. 489, 493, 568 P.2d 437, 439-40 (1977) (quoting Lockwood Grader Corp. v. Bockhaus, 129 Colo. 339, 345-46, 270 P.2d 193, 196 (1954)). The essence of a civil conspiracy claim is not the conspiracy itself, but the actual damages resulting from it.

  7. LS3 Inc. v. Cherokee Nation Strategic Programs, LLC

    No. 21-1385 (10th Cir. Aug. 17, 2022)   Cited 2 times

    Both require LS3 to prove breach of the underlying employment contracts. See Mem'l Gardens, Inc. v. Olympian Sales &Mgmt. Consultants, Inc., 690 P.2d 207, 210 (Colo. 1984) (recognizing liability for intentional interference requires "inducing or otherwise causing [a] third person not to perform [a] contract" (quoting Restatement (Second) of Torts § 766 (1977)); More v. Johnson, 568 P.2d 437, 440 (Colo. 1977) ("In a civil conspiracy action, the conspiracy is not actionable per se.").

  8. Scott v. Hern

    216 F.3d 897 (10th Cir. 2000)   Cited 379 times
    Holding a county attorney had absolute immunity from a § 1983 claim arising out of a civil commitment proceeding

    Finally, even if Scott's complaint could be read to allege that Newell, acting independently, obtained the medical records without Scott's consent and gave them to Hern, who then attached them to his affidavit knowing their unlawful provenance, "silent knowledge of an unlawful act is insufficient to establish the requisite agreement." More v. Johnson, 568 P.2d 437, 440 (Colo. 1977) (en banc). We therefore affirm on alternative grounds the judgment of the district court dismissing without prejudice the state law invasion of privacy claim against Hern and Newell.

  9. Koch v. U.S. Dept. of Interior

    47 F.3d 1015 (10th Cir. 1995)   Cited 40 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding a string of losses is indicative of whether the Government's position is substantially justified

    "The general rule of law followed in Colorado is that a deed conveying land bordered by a non-navigable stream includes the bed to the center." More v. Johnson, 193 Colo. 489, 568 P.2d 437, 439 (1977); see also United States v. Goodrich Farms Partnership, 947 F.2d 906, 908 (10th Cir. 1991); People v. Emmert, 198 Colo. 137, 597 P.2d 1025, 1027 (1979). This rule conforms to the common law rule for non-navigable waters.

  10. Goode v. Gaia, Inc.

    Civil Action 20-cv-00742-DDD-KLM (D. Colo. Feb. 28, 2022)   Cited 2 times

    Importantly, an express agreement is not necessary; however, there must be some indicia of an agreement presented by the plaintiff because a court will not simply infer a conspiracy. More v. Johnson, 568 P.2d 437, 440 (Colo. 1977).