Coates dissent is interesting, but misses the greater point.
I also suspect that there may be judicial estopple in the federal district court case in Alabama, where Health South would have been advancing the opposite argument in its initial answer than it is advancing in the Colorado state court case.
I wonder why the one Colorado Supreme Court Justice didn't participate. Probably either a HealthSouth stockholder. or a member of the Colorado Court of Appeals when the first level appeal was heard.
Comments (5)
Funny.
Coates dissent is interesting, but misses the greater point.
I also suspect that there may be judicial estopple in the federal district court case in Alabama, where Health South would have been advancing the opposite argument in its initial answer than it is advancing in the Colorado state court case.
I wonder why the one Colorado Supreme Court Justice didn't participate. Probably either a HealthSouth stockholder. or a member of the Colorado Court of Appeals when the first level appeal was heard.
Oh what tangled webs HeathSouth weaved.....
Posted by Nonny Mouse | February 7, 2011 12:28 PM
Very scrushy.
Posted by Allan L. | February 7, 2011 12:41 PM
I had to Google that Allan L. Props.
Posted by dman | February 7, 2011 1:59 PM
So what is the rules on this, Mr Bog. I understand they inflated assets to look better, but I thought taxes were based on RMV (at least in Colorado?)
This ignores the fact that the guys running HealthSouth were on the moral ladder one rung above NeilG.
Posted by Steve | February 7, 2011 4:13 PM
What a great case. Thanks for the link.
I assume this is not from the Onion, I mean even they could not make this stuff up.
Posted by Sid F. | February 7, 2011 6:03 PM