Response to Defendant’s Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Bill of Costs
Response to Defendant’s Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Bill of Costs
Plaintiff’s Unopposed Motion to Exceed Page and Word Limit in its Response to Defendant’s Motion for Attorney Fees and Bill of Costs
Plaintiff’s Unopposed Motion to Exceed Page and Word Limit in its Response to Defendant’s Motion for Attorney Fees and Bill of Costs
Plaintiff’s Reply in Support of Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Bill of Costs
Plaintiff’s Reply in Support of Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Bill of Costs
Plaintiff Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Bill of Costs
Plaintiff Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Bill of Costs
Defendant’s Response and Objection to Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Bill of Costs
Defendant’s Response and Objection to Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Bill of Costs
Defendant’s Reply in Support of Its Motion for Attorney Fees and Bill of Costs
Defendant’s Reply in Support of Its Motion for Attorney Fees and Bill of Costs
Defendant’s Motion for Attorney Fees and Bill of Costs
Defendant’s Motion for Attorney Fees and Bill of Costs
RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT FEE APPLICATION AND REQUEST FOR HEARING ON SAME PURSUANT TO C.R.C.P. 121
An objection to party’s request for attorney fees and costs.
REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO COMPEL COMPLIANCE WITH COURT ORDER OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, MOTION FOR CONTEMPT
A sample reply for plaintiff to compel with court order and also to pay attorney fees.
Order re Motion to Compel Compliance
The courts order on defendant’s motion to compel plaintiff to pay attorney fees.
Order on Motion to Compel
A signed court order on a motion for attorney fees.
MOTION FOR DISCOVERY ON ATTORNEY FEES
A motion for discovery on a request for attorney fees.
DEFENDANTS’ RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR ATTORNEY FEES AND COSTS AND REQUEST FOR HEARING
A sample response to request for attorney fees including a request for a hearing on the attorney fees matter.
A Colorado Supreme Court order dealing with the exclusionary rule and driver license DMV
The Department of Revenue, through the Division of Motor Vehicles, revoked a driver’s license, following a hearing officer’s determination that the driver had driven a motor vehicle with a blood alcohol content in excess of the statutory maximum. The district court reversed, holding that the initial stop of the driver’s vehicle was not supported by reasonable suspicion. The court of appeals reversed the district court and held that the legality of the initial contact between the police and the driver was not relevant in the civil administrative proceeding to revoke the driver’s license. The court also held that the exclusionary rule did not apply to suppress evidence of the driver’s BAC. The supreme court holds that, under section 42-2-126, C.R.S. (2011), “probable cause” in the context of the driver’s license revocation statute, as it existed at the time of the hearing in this case, refers to the quantum and quality of evidence necessary for a law enforcement officer to issue a notice of driver’s license revocation, not whether the officer’s initial contact with the driver was lawful. The supreme court further holds that the exclusionary rule did not apply to suppress evidence of the driver’s BAC in the driver’s license revocation proceeding. Accordingly, the supreme court affirms the judgment of the court of appeals.