 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Healthone v. Rodriguez6/24/2002
actual amount plaintiffs need to pay their medical expenses. Therefore, requiring that the periodic payments for future medical expenses terminate at the plaintiff's death clearly accomplishes the general assembly's goal and thus has a rational basis to a legitimate governmental objective.
Accordingly, we do not view the distinction made between an "incapacitated person represented by a conservator" and a "non-incapacitated person" to be arbitrary or unreasonable. Thus, our analysis regarding Rodriguez's equal protection challenge remains the same. We find that that the incapacitated person provision is rationally related to legitimate governmental objectives and thus conclude that it does not deny Rodriguez equal protection of the laws under the United States and Colorado Constitutions. Thus, we hold that the incapacitated person provision is constitutional.
IV. Conclusion
We find that Rodriguez did not waive his right to appeal by accepting the attorneys' fees awarded under the judgment. Furthermore, we hold that, as a matter of law, Ogin owed Rodriguez a common law duty of reasonable care. We further conclude that Rodriguez does have standing to challenge the constitutionality of the incapacitated person provision. Because we find that the incapacitated person provision is rationally related to legitimate governmental objectives, we hold that it is constitutional and does not violate Rodriguez's equal protection rights. Therefore, we reverse in part, affirm in part and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Colorado Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|