Court Opinion

ID: 9864850
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-25 16:14:11.614124+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:32:15.042512
License: Public Domain

Mr. Justice Moore
specially concurring.
The case of Reed v. Blakley, et al., 115 Colo. 559, 176 P. (2d) 681, was determined by our court January 14, *4531947. The majority of the court reached a conclusion in that case with which I could not have agreed had I been participating in the determination of the cause; however it received the consideration of all the members of the court as the same was then constituted. The rule there announced should not be overthrown and another substituted in its stead, simply because it might not be in harmony with the views of an individual judge who took office at a time subsequent to that determination. This court, in Reed v. Blakley, supra, with all justices participating, decided the issue here raised, and the opinion therein is stare decisis of every question presented by the record in the instant proceeding.
A change in personnel of the court should not have the effect of raising doubts concerning the finality of determinations theretofore recently made by a divided court. If the rule as announced in the Reed case leaves something to be desired a change can be effected by adoption of appropriate amendments to the law as construed in the Reed case.
Solely upon the ground of stare decisis I concur in the disposition of this cause.