1977, March, Pg. 480. Family Law Newsletter.

6 Colo.Law. 480

Colorado Lawyer

1977.

1977, March, Pg. 480.

Family Law Newsletter

480Vol. 6, No. 3, Pg. 480Family Law NewsletterNew Denver County Domestic Relation Case Assignment SystemThe following is the new case assignment system which will be utilized in order to avoid any possible judge shopping in Denver County Domestic Relations Court:

  1. As cases are filed, they will be assigned a consecutive case number which will be placed on a card similar to those used for civil actions.

  2. The Court Administrator will assign the cases on the next business day in the following manner:

    (a) The cards will be shuffled and placed into two equal stacks for assignment to the two Domestic Relations Courtrooms (Courtrooms 4 and 5).

    (b) If there is an uneven number of cases to be divided in a given day, the odd case will be assigned to the odd or even numbered courtroom corresponding to that odd or even date of the month. (Example: if twenty-one cases are filed on March 3, ten cases will be assigned to courtroom 4 and eleven cases will be assigned to courtroom 5.)

  3. Temporary restraining orders or other immediate action required at the time of filing will be handled as follows: Attorneys will be directed to the odd or even courtroom corresponding to that odd or even numbered date of the month for immediate action. This will not affect the assignment of the case to a particular courtroom. Assignments will still be accomplished in accordance with the procedures outlined in paragraphs 1 and 2 above. (Courtroom 4 will hear TRO's at 8:30 a.m. Courtroom 5 will hear TRO's at 8:30 a.m. and at 1:30 p.m.)

  4. Attorneys will be advised of courtroom assignments in the same manner currently followed in assigning civil cases. A label will be mailed from the court indicating the case caption, case number and courtroom assignment.

    BNA Family Law Reporter CapsulesSeparation Agreement Voided Due to Unconscionable Overreaching---The Idaho Supreme Court found unconscionable overreaching on the part of the wife in the execution of a separation agreement drawn by the wife's attorney where the husband was unrepresented and was led to believe that wife's attorney was working to protect both his and his wife's interests.

    Under the agreement the husband was required to pay all college expenses of their 19-year old son and also pay the wife 37.4...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT