The first time I smoked a cigarette, I was 14 years old. By the time I was an adult, I was smoking two packs a day. I tried the nicotine patch, gum, and even Chantix, the pharmaceutical drug, to quit smoking cigarettes. None of these worked. I’m embarrassed to say that I even tried hypnosis. It wasn’t until I tried vaping as an adult that I was able to find a solution and quit smoking those dreadful cigarettes. Vaping was so effective, I quit smoking cigarettes in one weekend after 20 years of addictive cigarette smoking. I’m one of the 350,000 Coloradans and one of approximate 13 million responsible adults in America who have used vaping products to quit smoking more harmful cigarettes.

As RTD scatters the homeless, many are likely to crowd into the few areas where they are still allowed during the lockdown, possibly exacerbating this public health crisis.

Sixty years ago, a young president urged us to ask what we could do for our country. We have not heard that challenge since. But now our health and economic threats require us to renew that challenge and recover the ideal of service.

In the midst of the constant up-and-down of coronavirus news, both from science and the markets, it’s easy to lose sight of the scariest scenario of them all: the one where there’s no magic bullet. In this entirely plausible situation, there would be no effective Covid-19 vaccine or transformative therapy; the combination of testing and contact tracing wouldn’t successfully suppress the outbreak; and herd immunity would come, if at all, only after millions of deaths around the world.

The restaurant industry predicts that as many as 30% of all Denver restaurants and 22% statewide may permanently go out of business if they can’t open before the end of May.

How strong is our economy if it can’t absorb shocks? If growth comes at a great expense to future generations? And where is the scorecard that tells us how we are actually doing?

Colorado’s more than 900,000 public school students learned March 12 that schools would close for at least an extended spring break. It was an abrupt change and not everyone adapted quickly or easily.

Coloradans favor Democratic U.S. Senate candidate John Hickenlooper over Republican incumbent Sen. Cory Gardner by 18 points, results from a poll released Wednesday showed.

Colorado Republican Party Chair Ken Buck, a U.S. representative from Windsor, pressured a local party official to submit incorrect election results to set the primary ballot for a state Senate seat, according to an audio recording of a conference call obtained by The Denver Post.

A document created by the nation's top disease investigators with step-by-step advice to local authorities on how and when to reopen restaurants and other public places during the still-raging outbreak has been shelved by the Trump administration.

The decision to wear a mask in public is becoming a political statement — a moment to pick sides in a brewing culture war over containing the coronavirus.

A unanimous Supreme Court on Thursday threw out the convictions of two political insiders involved in the “Bridgegate” scandal that ultimately derailed the 2016 presidential bid of then-New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie. The justices found evidence of deception, corruption and abuse of power in the scheme, but said “not every corrupt act by state or local officials is a federal crime.”

Colorado Republican Chairman Ken Buck is facing criticism from within his own party after revelations that he pressured another party official to submit incorrect election results — and then spent party money to defend the move. At least two party executives say they were surprised to learn Buck — who’s also a U.S. representative — […]

Local government orders mandating residents wear masks have become a political flash point in Colorado’s ongoing coronavirus pandemic response.

The Weld County GOP chairman has filed a complaint with the local district attorney and the Secretary of State’s Office accusing an aide to Republican U.S. Rep. Ken Buck and three others of election fraud and corruption.

Immigrant advocates are working with Colorado lawmakers to provide relief to vulnerable families during the coronavirus crisis.

(United States Third Circuit) - Affirmed that a broker-dealer was required to arbitrate a customer's claim. The broker-dealer had placed a contractual clause in its agreement with an institutional customer stating that the customer must bring any claims arising out of their agreement in a particular federal court. Splitting from several other circuits on the enforceability of such forum-selection clauses, the Third Circuit held that the clause was unenforceable because it would circumvent Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) Rule 12200. The panel therefore affirmed an order compelling the broker-dealer to submit to FINRA arbitration.

(United States Third Circuit) - Remanded for reconsideration of whether former employees of an asbestos mining and processing operation in Montana could bring a negligence suit against the now-bankrupt company's insurers. The insurers sought a declaratory judgment that the former employees, who now suffer from asbestos disease, were barred from proceeding with their lawsuit because the bankruptcy court had already created a trust to compensate persons injured by the company's asbestos. On appeal, the Third Circuit affirmed in part and vacated and remanded in part.

(United States Third Circuit) - Affirmed the dismissal of a lawsuit brought by investors of a bankrupt company who claimed they were entitled to dividend payments. The investors, who purchased their shares with notice of the bankruptcy, claimed that the company and several of its officers were liable for failing to pay them a dividend they were owed. Rejecting their arguments, the Third Circuit held that the investors were bound by the reorganization plan, including its releases of liability.

(United States Third Circuit) - Held that an automobile insurance company that settled claims against a driver arising out of a car crash could bring a contribution suit against a restaurant that allegedly over-served alcoholic beverages to the driver. The restaurant insisted that Pennsylvania's Dram Shop Law subjected it to liability only to injured individuals themselves. However, the Third Circuit concluded that the Dram Shop Law did not prevent the insurance company from bringing a suit against the restaurant under the Uniform Contribution Among Tortfeasors Act. The panel therefore reversed dismissal of the insurer's complaint.

(United States Third Circuit) - Reinstated a claim that a debt collector violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act by leaving telephone voice messages that did not use its true name. The plaintiffs filed a class-action complaint alleging that the debt collector left pre-recorded messages on their phone that did not state the caller's correct name. Reversing the district court, the Third Circuit held that they stated a plausible claim for relief under the statute's true-name provision, though the panel affirmed the dismissal of their other causes of action.

(United States Third Circuit) - Held that a man with mental retardation who was detained for nearly a decade awaiting trial could amend his civil rights complaint against the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Reversing the district court, the Third Circuit held that the man, who was charged with a crime that may not have occurred, was entitled to amend his complaint to reinstitute his due process and Americans with Disabilities Act claims. The panel affirmed dismissal of his Section 1983 claims, however.

(United States Third Circuit) - Reinstated a former 911 dispatcher's claim that her former supervisors gave false, defamatory job references to her prospective employers to retaliate against her for her previous employment complaints, in violation of her constitutional rights. The dispatcher claimed that undeserved negative references had prevented her from obtaining other employment. Reversing the dismissal of her complaint, the Third Circuit held that she adequately pleaded a First Amendment retaliation claim.

(United States Third Circuit) - Held that a company could not be compelled to arbitrate a dispute over retiree healthcare benefits. The manufacturing company argued that the dispute over retiree benefits was not arbitrable because there was no provision in the collective-bargaining agreement regarding such benefits, and the memorandum of agreement discussing the matter did not provide for arbitration. Agreeing with the company, the Third Circuit concluded that the district court erred in ordering that the dispute be arbitrated under the Labor Management Relations Act.

(United States Third Circuit) - Reinstated a False Claims Act lawsuit alleging fraud in connection with the sale of pharmaceutical drugs to nursing homes. The defendant company, which owns and operates institutional pharmacies, argued for dismissal of the qui tam action on the ground that the allegation was already known to the public, and the district court agreed. Reversing and remanding, the Third Circuit held that the relator's allegation had not previously been publicly disclosed.

(United States Third Circuit) - Held that the bankruptcy court correctly disallowed a claim brought by the debtor's former employee. A former television station employee argued that the station, whose owner was now in bankruptcy, was liable for unlawful racial discrimination. Affirming summary judgment against his claim, the Third Circuit concluded that he failed to raise a triable issue and, further, that it was too late for him to challenge the bankruptcy court’s jurisdiction to hear his discrimination claim, since he never objected to this during bankruptcy proceedings.

(United States Third Circuit) - Vacated a ruling allocating the costs of cleaning up a contaminated manufacturing site. A successor company brought a contribution action against its predecessor company seeking to recover the costs it had incurred when government regulators forced it to remediate the site. The district court arrived at a percentage method of splitting the costs between the two companies, but on appeal the Third Circuit reversed and remanded for further proceedings.

(United States Third Circuit) - Held that it was not an abuse of discretion to deny a fee petition in its entirety when the amount requested was outrageously excessive. The Third Circuit formally endorsed the view that where a fee-shifting statute provides a court discretion to award attorney fees, such discretion includes the ability to deny a fee request altogether when, under the circumstances, the amount requested is outrageously excessive. The panel thus affirmed the denial of a fee award to a prevailing plaintiff in an insurance bad faith case.

(United States Third Circuit) - Held that a company that entered into an unconsummated merger agreement was not entitled to payment of a $275 million termination fee. The proposed merger had been approved by a bankruptcy court because one of the parties was in Chapter 11 bankruptcy. The Third Circuit held that the bankruptcy court did not err in narrowing the circumstances under which the termination fee would be triggered, resulting ultimately in no fee being paid.

(United States Third Circuit) - Affirmed the dismissal of a lawsuit brought by investors of a bankrupt company who claimed they were entitled to dividend payments. The investors, who purchased their shares with notice of the bankruptcy, claimed that the company and several of its officers were liable for failing to pay them a dividend they were owed. Rejecting their arguments, the Third Circuit held that the investors were bound by the reorganization plan, including its releases of liability.

(United States Third Circuit) - Held that the bankruptcy court correctly disallowed a claim brought by the debtor's former employee. A former television station employee argued that the station, whose owner was now in bankruptcy, was liable for unlawful racial discrimination. Affirming summary judgment against his claim, the Third Circuit concluded that he failed to raise a triable issue and, further, that it was too late for him to challenge the bankruptcy court’s jurisdiction to hear his discrimination claim, since he never objected to this during bankruptcy proceedings.

(United States Third Circuit) - Held that a company that entered into an unconsummated merger agreement was not entitled to payment of a $275 million termination fee. The proposed merger had been approved by a bankruptcy court because one of the parties was in Chapter 11 bankruptcy. The Third Circuit held that the bankruptcy court did not err in narrowing the circumstances under which the termination fee would be triggered, resulting ultimately in no fee being paid.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Held that a bankruptcy debtor who sought damages for willful violation of the automatic stay was entitled to attorney fees on appeal. When an appeal is necessary to secure such damages, appellate attorney fees and costs should also be granted to a successful debtor, regardless of which party brings the appeal. Reversed the district court's order.

(United States Second Circuit) - Affirmed a judgment in a dispute between two creditors of an agricultural produce company that filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy. One of the creditors was another produce company that did business with the debtor. Because the goods were perishable agricultural commodities, the case involved the federal Perishable Agricultural Commodities Act.

(United States Fifth Circuit) - Held that energy companies emerging from bankruptcy did not have to pay certain creditors a contractual make-whole amount, even though the companies were now solvent due to a rise in commodity prices. Vacated and remanded.

(United States Fifth Circuit) - Held that bankruptcy trustees are entitled to qualified immunity for personal harms caused by actions that, while not pursuant to a court order, fall within the scope of their official duties. Affirmed the dismissal of an adversary proceeding against a bankruptcy trustee.

(United States Seventh Circuit) - Rejected a mootness argument in a dispute between an insolvent borrower and the holder of a mortgage note. Overruled In re River West Plaza-Chicago LLC, 664 F.3d 668 (7th Cir. 2011), holding that 11 U.S.C. section 363(m) does not make any dispute moot or prevent a bankruptcy court from deciding what shall be done with the proceeds of a sale or lease.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - In the bankruptcy proceeding of a distributor of bulk petroleum products, held that a consignor's unperfected security interest in fuel and monetary proceeds was subordinate to the trustee's interest. Affirmed the judgment below.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Affirmed a real estate business's Chapter 11 reorganization plan. Held that the plan was lawfully proposed even though a lessee illegally grew marijuana. Rejected a challenge brought by the United States Trustee.

(United States Fifth Circuit) - Reversed, vacated, and remanded. Holding that a creditor can establish that its expenses are attributable to the actions of the bankruptcy estate through evidence of either a direct request from the debtor-in-possession or other inducement via the knowing and voluntary post-petition acceptance of desired goods or services.

(United States Fifth Circuit) - Affirmed. The bankruptcy court's rejection of a Texas Port Authority's claims of sovereign immunity and fraud in their gambit to invalidate a bankruptcy sale that extinguished an easement they held was affirmed because there was no Eleventh Amendment violation or basis to claim fraud.

It’ll take more than a probing, eight-inch nasal swab to keep Justin Gaethje from taking his shot at a UFC title belt. Even an interim one.

Are the two offensive tackles who will start for the Broncos in 2021 on the current roster? It seems increasingly unlikely.

In normality, life without hockey is barely tolerable during the quiet months of July and August -- from the time free agency dries up to the start of rookie camp in early September.

Instead of scheming to stop James Harden or plotting a way to find Nikola Jokic some rest within a grueling playoff series, the Nuggets have a new problem to address amid the coronavirus pandemic. Staying engaged.

Colorado lawmakers don't have to meet for 120 consecutive days during a declared public health emergency, the Colorado Supreme Court ruled in a narrow decision Wednesday.

Colorado lawmakers are hopeful that they'll be back at the Capitol as early as May, but they caution that it will depend on the advice of experts and whether the state's state-at-home order is still in place.

Colorado lawmakers may forgo raises next year as they anticipate having to make major changes in the overall state budget -- including eliminating raises for all state employees.

The state's budget writers are now planning for a shortfall that's measured in billions rather than millions -- taking the possibility of new spending off the table and threatening existing programs.

Democratic state lawmakers say hate and bigotry are on the rise during the COVID-19 pandemic and they’re asking Coloradans to join them in condemning it.