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 data-spec-version="0.0.3dev" data-generated-on="2024-07-14">
<div class="generated-from-iceberg vlex-toc">
<link href="https://doc-stylesheets.vlex.com/ldml-xml.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"></link>
<div class="ldml-decision"><div class="ldml-decision"><div class="ldml-header header ldml-header content__heading content__heading--depth1" data-content-heading-label="Header" data-refglobal="case:publicservicecompanyofcoloradovoutdoordesignlandscaping,llcno23sc659july1,2024"><p class="ldml-metadata">
1
</p><p class="ldml-metadata"><b class="ldml-bold"> <span class="ldml-party"><span class="ldml-name">Public Service Company of Colorado</span></span>, d/b/a <span class="ldml-party"><span class="ldml-name">Xcel Energy</span>, <span class="ldml-role">Petitioner</span>/<span class="ldml-role">Cross-Respondent</span></span> </b><b class="ldml-bold"> v. </b><b class="ldml-bold"> <span class="ldml-party"><span class="ldml-name">Outdoor Design Landscaping, LLC</span>, and <span class="ldml-role">Respondent</span>/<span class="ldml-role">Cross-Petitioner</span></span> </b></p><p class="ldml-metadata"><b class="ldml-bold"> Francisco Cuevas. Respondent </b></p><p class="ldml-metadata"><span class="ldml-cite"><b class="ldml-bold">No. 23SC659</b></span></p><p class="ldml-metadata"><b class="ldml-bold"><span class="ldml-court">Supreme Court of Colorado</span>, En Banc</b></p><p class="ldml-metadata"><span class="ldml-date"><b class="ldml-bold">July 1, 2024</b></span></p></div>
<div class="ldml-casehistory"><p data-paragraph-id="255" class="ldml-paragraph ">
<span data-paragraph-id="255" data-sentence-id="272" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">Court
of Appeals</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_272"><span class="ldml-cite">Case Nos. 22CA301</span></a></span> & <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_272"><span class="ldml-cite">22CA1108</span></a></span></span>
</p></div><div class="ldml-opinion content__heading content__heading--depth1" data-content-heading-label="Opinion"><p data-paragraph-id="324" class="ldml-paragraph ">
<span data-paragraph-id="324" data-sentence-id="340" class="ldml-sentence">Petition
and <span class="ldml-entity">Cross-Petition for Writ</span> of Certiorari GRANTED.</span>
</p><p data-paragraph-id="406" class="ldml-paragraph ">
<span data-paragraph-id="406" data-sentence-id="422" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-parenthetical">[REFRAMED]</span>
Whether <span class="ldml-entity">the court of appeals</span> 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="628" class="ldml-paragraph ">
<span data-paragraph-id="628" data-sentence-id="644" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-parenthetical">[REFRAMED]</span>
Whether <span class="ldml-entity">the court of appeals</span> erred in holding that the
General Assembly had not expressly delegated authority to the
<span class="ldml-entity">Public Utilities Commission</span> to approve a tariff limiting tort
liability in derogation of common law.</span>
</p><p data-paragraph-id="897" class="ldml-paragraph ">
<span data-paragraph-id="897" data-sentence-id="913" class="ldml-sentence">Whether
<span class="ldml-entity">the court of appeals</span> erred in holding that <span class="ldml-entity">Respondent</span> was not
a <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"person"</span> subject to the notification requirements
of the <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-refname">High Voltage Safety Act</span>, <span class="ldml-cite">§ 9-2.5-102<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span>, C.R.S.</span>
<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">2023</span>)</span></a></span>.</span>
</p><p data-paragraph-id="1116" class="ldml-paragraph ">
<span data-paragraph-id="1116" data-sentence-id="1132" class="ldml-sentence">Whether
<span class="ldml-entity">the court of appeals</span> erred in interpreting <span class="ldml-entity">section</span>
<span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">9-2.5-104<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(2)</span>, C.R.S.</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">2023</span>)</span></a></span> such that it renders the words
<span class="ldml-quotation quote">"results in,"</span> <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"caused by the contact"</span> and
<span class="ldml-quotation quote">"due to the contact"</span> superfluous.</span>
</p><p data-paragraph-id="1344" class="ldml-paragraph ">
<span data-paragraph-id="1344" data-sentence-id="1360" class="ldml-sentence">DENIED
AS TO ALL OTHER ISSUES.</span>
</p></div></div></div>
</div>
</div>