Court Opinion

ID: 9864896
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-25 16:16:07.177171+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:32:31.318319
License: Public Domain

Mr. Justice Hilliard,
specially concurring.
On the theory that Frank v. Industrial Commission, 96 Colo. 364, 43 P. (2d) 158, an earlier review in this same matter, constituted the “law of the case,” for which there is Colorado authority, I favored affirmance of the judgment here; but since, notwithstanding my view, the court on this presentation has determined that that decision is not to be regarded as controlling, and moreover has rejected the pronouncement there, my conception of the duty of a member of a bank of judges in such situation has prompted me to further consideration of the merits. As the result, details forborne, I now think we erred in rendering the decision reported in 96 Colorado; and as the present court opinion requires only that the claimant shall prove his case, not unreasonable, in any view, I join therein.