C.r.c.p. Rule 106: Amendments Governing Appeals from Local Governmental Decisions
| Publication year | 1986 |
| Pages | 1643 |
| Citation | Vol. 15 No. 9 Pg. 1643 |
1986, September, Pg. 1643. C.R.C.P. Rule 106: Amendments Governing Appeals from Local Governmental Decisions
The rule governing appeals of governmental decisions has been significantly amended. This is of interest not only to lawyers representing local governments, but also to lawyers whose clients may have occasion to dispute certain quasi-judicial decisions of a city planning commission, board of county commissioners, school board and similar bodies. For those unfamiliar with local quasi-judicial proceedings, it should be noted that the process detailed in this article must be initiated within only thirty days of the decision of the local official or commission.
On August 23, 1985, the Colorado Supreme Court adopted substantial amendments to Colorado Rules of Civil Procedure ("C.R.C.P.") Rule 106 (hereafter, "Rule 106").(fn1) These became effective January 1, 1986.(fn2) This article reviews the amendments, highlighting the changes from the old procedures used in obtaining Rule 106(a)(4) certiorari review.
The initial amendment made by the Supreme Court asserts that the relief authorized by Rule 106(a) may be obtained in district court by appropriate action under the practice prescribed in "the Colorado Rules of Civil Procedure."(fn3) The old language simply alluded to "these rules."(fn4)
The major changes to Rule 106, both substantively and procedurally, are found in Rule 106(a)(4). Initially, subsection (4) was amended by the deletion of the phrase "inferior tribunal" and replaced with "any governmental body or officer or any lower judicial body. . . ."(fn5) From there, subsection (4) was greatly expanded by the addition of nine subsections which subsumed the original language. These new subsections now provide the basis for Rule 106 practice in the district courts.
Initially, the Supreme Court made it clear that judicial review is still limited to a determination of whether the defendant body or officer has exceeded its jurisdiction or abused its discretion, based on evidence in the record.(fn6) The court then revised the procedures for commencing the Rule 106 action. Previously, there was much confusion as to whether or not a Rule 106 action was commenced by the filing of a complaint under the C.R.C.P. or by the filing of a petition. Both methods were used. Now it is clear that the action is commenced by the filing of a complaint.(fn7) An answer or other responsive pleading is then required to be filed in accordance with the C.R.C.P.(fn8)
Moreover, the procedure for directing the defendant body or officer to return the record to the court has been completely changed...
To continue reading
Request your trial