|
<br />
<br />I~'C~./'
<br />J ,....-
<br />'- .;;.~t.
<br />
<br />~, '4.:":
<br />+'~~'
<br />,)~,~
<br />'",,' ,',
<br />..~,......,-
<br />~;:,~t.
<br />
<br />128
<br />
<br />'.3110 notify gcn-
<br />y.
<br />r ,rudgmenls.
<br />i,ublic entities
<br />lhe stale to
<br />tRee.
<br />'ublic entities to
<br />":1.' co\"erage.
<br />to obtain insur.
<br />
<br />attachment not
<br />
<br />'InSI public
<br />rL'Quir~menlS
<br />11$.
<br />.)f article 10
<br />,~'dcrallaw.
<br />
<br />!,c ci led as
<br />&n
<br />Q)
<br />(\')
<br />...
<br />
<br />JI assemblv
<br />,d ilS polit-
<br />by p,ivale
<br />11 assemblv
<br />e of sover-
<br />cI,ine shall
<br />rhe gene,al
<br />Ins provide
<br />, could dis-
<br />Ilial public
<br />tat lhe lax-
<br />Ibilily and
<br />Jloyees a,e
<br />" bu'dens.
<br />Jppointed.
<br />[hat such
<br />:s or fune-
<br />ho,ized 0'
<br />JI subdivi-
<br />of 1he se,-
<br />Isequences
<br />e for thei,
<br />ct 10 such
<br />"so recog-
<br />Umstances
<br />c employ_
<br />1 0' could
<br />
<br />129
<br />
<br />Governmental Immunity
<br />
<br />24-10-103
<br />
<br />lie in tort 'egardless of whet he, that ,may be the type of action 0' the fo,m
<br />of relief chosen by a claimant and that the distinction 1'0' liability pu'poses
<br />between governmental and p,op,ietary functions should be abolished.
<br />
<br />Source: L. 71, p. 1204. ~ I; eR.S. 1963. ~ 130-11-2; L. 79. p. 862. ~ I;
<br />L. 86. p. 873. ~ I.
<br />
<br />C.J.5.5ee 81 A (',J,5,. 5'a'es. j j ~98,307,
<br />Just compensation clause of cons.itution cre-
<br />ates Ii!'Xceprion 10 doctrine of RovernmenlaJ
<br />immunih'. Srb v. Board of Count... Comm'r5.
<br />~3 Colo:,~pp, [4. 601 P.~d [08~ i1979), con,
<br />dismissed. 199 Colo. 496. 618 P,~d [105
<br />1[980),
<br />As dl>es making of \tiislath'e contract. The
<br />making of 3 contract pursuant to legislatl\'e
<br />3U1horit... is a wilin~r b... the state of ils
<br />immun(I\' from suit and of anv stalutor\.
<br />requirement for the liIing of claims. Ace Fly-
<br />ing Serv.. Inc. .....Colorado DeP'1 of .-\gricul.
<br />lure. 136 Colo, 19, 3 [4 P,~d ~78 II 95 71
<br />fdecided under formerCRS 53. ~ 130-:!.]).
<br />The Colorado Governmental Immunir\' Act
<br />does not apply to claims based on fedemi ci...il
<br />rights ..'iolalions. Maninez.... EI Paso County.
<br />673 F, 5upp, 1030(0, Co[o, [987\.
<br />~o immunity (Or" sister state's activities in
<br />tbis state. Where an injured pany is a citizen
<br />of Ihis Slate, injured in this state. and sues in
<br />
<br />Ihe couns oflhis slate. there is no immunit\".
<br />by law or as a maner of comity. covering.a
<br />sistcr state.s activities in Ihls state. Peterson \".
<br />Statc of Texas. 635 P.:!d 1-11 (Cola, App.
<br />19811.
<br />Stare !ltatutor)' proyisions control oYer eon-
<br />nielinR til)' charier. If a city charter establishes
<br />a difTerent notice of claim pr()('cdur~. it con.
<br />Iliels '-"llh the stilte SliltUlory provisions. :Jnd
<br />when a conllict (':dsls in a matter of both state-
<br />wide and local concern. the state slatutc con.
<br />trois. Lipira v. City of Thornton. -II Colo.
<br />App. 401. 585 P,~d 93~ ([ 978),
<br />Applied in City of Colorado Springs \".
<br />G1adin. 198 Colo. ~~J. ;99 P,1d 907 f (979):
<br />South of Second A~\ocs. \'. Georgetown. ] 99
<br />Colo. 394. 609 P..:!d 1.:!5 (1980): Forrest \..
<br />County Comm'rs. .629 P.~d .IIOS (Colo. .App,
<br />1981): Young \., State. 6~2 P.:!d 18. (Colo.
<br />App. 1981): Mucci v. Falcon School Din. No.
<br />49".655 P..:!d 421(Colo. App. 1982). .
<br />
<br />2~-1O-103. Definitions. ,-\s used in this article. unless the contex1 olhe,'
<br />Wlse reqUIres:
<br />(I) "Dange,ous condition" meanS a physical condition of a facility 0'
<br />the use the,eof which constitutes an unreasonable ,isk to the health 0' safety
<br />of the public. which is known to exist 0' which in the exe,cise of ,easonable
<br />ca,e should have been known to exist and which condition is p,oximatelv
<br />caused by the negligent act or omission of the public entity in const,ucting
<br />0' maintaining such facility, Fo, the purposes of this subsection (I). a dange,-
<br />ous condition should have been known to exist if it is established that the
<br />condition had existed fo, such a pe,iod of time and was of such a natu'e
<br />that. in the exe,cise of ,easonable ca'e. such condition and its dange,ous
<br />cha,acter should have been discove,ed, A dange,ous condition shall not exist
<br />solely because lhe design of any facility is inadequate. The me'e existence
<br />of wind. 'wate,. snow. ice. 0' 1empe,atu,e shall not. by itself, constitute a
<br />dangerous condition. Nothing in thIs subsection ( I) shall p,eclude a partic-
<br />ula, dange,ous accumulation ofwate,. snow. 0' ice f,om being found 10 con-
<br />stitute a dange,ous condition when a public entity fails 10 use existing means
<br />available to it 1'0' the ,emoval of such accumulation and when the public
<br />entity had notice of such accumulation and reasonable lime to act.
<br />(1.5) "Health ca'e p,actitione," means a physician. dentist. c1in[cal psy-
<br />chOlogist. 0' any olhe, pe,son acting at the di,ection 0' unde, the supervision
<br />0' cont,ol of any such persons.
<br />(2) "Injury" means death. injury to a person. damage to 0' loss of p'op-
<br />eny. of whatsoeve, kind. which. if inflicted by a p'ivate pe'son. would lie "
<br />
|