Town of Breckenridge v. Egencia, LLC.

Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Opinions of the Colorado Supreme Court are available to the public and can be accessed through the Judicial Branch’s homepage at Opinions are also posted on the Colorado Bar Association’s homepage at ADVANCE SHEET HEADNOTE May 28, 2019 2019 CO 39 No. 18SC186, Town of Breckenridge v. Egencia, LLC. By operation of law, the decision of the court of appeals case no. 16CA1901 (Colo. App. Jan. 25, 2018) is affirmed by an equally divided court. See C.A.R. 35(b). The Supreme Court of the State of Colorado 2 East 14th Avenue • Denver, Colorado 80203 2019 CO 39 Supreme Court Case No. 18SC186 Certiorari to the Colorado Court of Appeals Court of Appeals Case No. 16CA1901 Petitioner: Town of Breckenridge, v. Respondents: Egencia, LLC; Expedia, Inc.; GP, LLC; Hotwire, Inc.; Internetwork Publishing Corporation d/b/a;, Inc.; Orbitz, Inc.; Orbitz, LLC;, Incorporated;, LLC;, LP; Travelport, Inc. f/k/a Cendant Travel Distribution Services Group, Inc.; Travelscape, LLC.; Travelweb, LLC.; and Trip Network, Inc. d/b/a . Affirmed by Operation of Law en banc May 28, 2019 Attorneys for Petitioner: Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP Michael Plachy Amy Danielle Wills Joy Allen Woller Thomas M. Rogers III Denver, Colorado Attorneys for Respondents: Connelly Law, LLC Sean Connelly Denver, Colorado Attorneys for Amicus Curiae American Society of Travel Advisors: Blain Myhre LLC Blain David Myhre Denver, Colorado Attorneys for Amici Curiae Colorado Association of SkiTowns and Colorado Hotel and Lodging Association: Richard B. Benenson Justin L. Cohen Brownstein Hyatt Farber & Schreck LLP Denver, Colorado Attorneys for Amicus Curiae Colorado Department of Revenue Philip J. Weiser, Attorney General Scott R. Bauer, Senior Assistant Attorney General Russell D. Johnson, Assistant Solicitor General Denver, Colorado PER CURIAM. JUSTICE HART does not participate. 2 ¶1 Justice Boatright, Justice Hood and Justice Gabriel are of the opinion that the judgment of the court of appeals should be affirmed; whereas Chief Justice Coats, Justice Márquez, and Justice Samour are of the opinion that it should be reversed. Justice Hart does not participate. ¶2 Because the court is equally divided, the judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed by operation of law C.A.R. 35(b). 3