Public Service Company of Colorado, d/b/a Xcel Energy, Petitioner/Cross-Respondent v. Outdoor Design Landscaping, LLC, and Respondent/Cross-Petitioner Francisco Cuevas. ( 2024 )

<div class="content">
<div class="html-children">
<div><header><p id="Page" data-paragraph-id="35c0804c86"> 1 </p><center><b></b><p data-paragraph-id="0dcc3649cd"><span data-sentence-id="cc6264b8a8" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="0dcc3649cd"> Public Service Company of Colorado, d/b/a Xcel Energy, Petitioner/Cross-Respondent <br /> v.</span><span data-sentence-id="925b4b4cd8" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="0dcc3649cd"> <br /> Outdoor Design Landscaping, LLC, and Respondent/Cross-Petitioner </span></p><p data-paragraph-id="09413ca50b"> Francisco Cuevas. Respondent </p><p data-paragraph-id="27d4775177">No. 23SC659</p><p data-paragraph-id="2fefc1cee8"><span data-sentence-id="2fefc1cee8" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="2fefc1cee8">Supreme Court of Colorado, En Banc</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="ca853be1b1">July 1, 2024</p></center></header><br /><!--OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE-->
<p id="AppealLine" data-paragraph-id="0bec4bf50f"><span data-sentence-id="35cd619c9e" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="0bec4bf50f"> Court of Appeals Case Nos. 22CA301 &amp; 22CA1108 </span></p>
<p id="MajorityOpinion" data-paragraph-id="d41d8cd98f"></p>
<p data-paragraph-id="fb4aacd08b"><span data-sentence-id="de4e031ee1" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="fb4aacd08b"> Petition and Cross-Petition for Writ of Certiorari GRANTED.</span> </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="e469772531"><span data-sentence-id="44efbfc50c" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="e469772531"> [REFRAMED] Whether the court of appeals erred in holding that a provision in a utility's tariff purporting to limit the utility's liability only applies to customers of the utility.</span> </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="e36a50f2ca"><span data-sentence-id="afbe690fe2" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="e36a50f2ca"> [REFRAMED] Whether the court of appeals erred in holding that the General Assembly had not expressly delegated authority to the Public Utilities Commission to approve a tariff limiting tort liability in derogation of common law.</span> </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="1e68a220f9"><span data-sentence-id="1acc3da3c4" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="1e68a220f9"> Whether the court of appeals erred in holding that Respondent was not a "person" subject to the notification requirements of the High Voltage Safety Act, § 9-2.5-102(1), C.R.S. (2023).</span> </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="201921cc7e"><span data-sentence-id="181e805e89" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="201921cc7e"> Whether the court of appeals erred in interpreting section 9-2.5-104(2), C.R.S. (2023) such that it renders the words "results in," "caused by the contact" and "due to the contact" superfluous.</span> </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="0a769443c7"><span data-sentence-id="3f8d61f371" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="0a769443c7"> DENIED AS TO ALL OTHER ISSUES.</span> </p></div>
</div>
</div>