Court Business
| Publication year | 2009 |
| Pages | 119 |
2009, June, Pg. 119. Court Business
June 2009
Vol. 38, No. 6 [Page 119]
Visit the related court's website for complete text of rule changes or proposed rule changes issued by the court. Each court's website includes corresponding forms, which are not printed in Court Business, and versions with highlights of revisions (deletions and additions). Material printed in Court Business appears as submitted by the court and has not been edited by the staff of The Colorado Lawyer.
Order of April 23, 2009Concerning the Filing of White River Drainage Basin Water Court Applications On and After August 5, 2009, Pursuant to C.R.S. § 37-92-201(1), Colorado Rule of Civil Procedure 90, and Rule 2 of the Uniform Local Rules for All Water Court Divisions
Senate Bill 09-15, to be codified at C.R.S. § 37-92-201(1), with an effective date of August 5, 2009, places the White River Drainage Basin within the authorities of the water court and the division engineer for Water Division No. 6. Thus, on and after August 5, 2009, the proper filing venue for all White River Drainage Basin applications and subsequent documents is Water Division No. 6. Under the prior statutory provision, venue for White River Drainage Basin applications has been in Water Division No. 5.
Revised Water Court Rule 2 of the Uniform Local Rules for All Water Court Divisions, with an effective date of July 1, 2009, requires counsel for applicants and opposers to file and serve applications and all subsequent documents through the approved judicial branch e-filing service provider. Rule 2 also provides that applicants and opposers without counsel shall file a single copy of the application and all subsequent documents in original paper format, and the water clerk shall scan and upload such paper-filed documents to the approved judicial branch e-filing system.
On and after August 5, 2009, the Water Clerk for Water Division No. 6 shall accept for filing and publication all White River Drainage Basin applications, and subsequent documents in the case, filed in Water Division No. 6.
On and after August 5, 2009, the Water Clerk for Water Division No. 5 shall not accept for filing and publication any White River Drainage Basin applications attempted to be filed in Water Division No. 5.
The Water Clerk for Water Division No. 5 shall issue pre-cancellation notices pursuant to C.R.S. § 37-92-305(7) for all White River Drainage Basin applications filed prior to August 5, 2009 that are subject to future findings of reasonable diligence. The pre-cancellation notices shall direct applicants to file applications for findings of reasonable diligence in Water Division No. 6. The Water Clerk for Water Division No. 5 shall make available to the Water Court for Water Division No. 6 all prior cases that pertain to the diligence applications upon the issuance of the pre-cancellation notice.
To help alert White River Drainage Basin applicants and their attorneys regarding these statutory and rule revisions, the water clerks for Water Divisions No. 5 and No. 6 shall publish this order in the May through August 2009 full resumes of applications for both divisions.
Dated this 23rd day of April 2009.
By the Court:
Mary J. MullarkeyChief Justice, Colorado Supreme Court
Colorado Supreme Court Judicial Code Committee
Notice of Public Hearing and Request for Comments
Colorado Code of Judicial Conduct
Hearing to be held on Thursday, October 22, 2009 at 1:30 p.m.Deadline for Comments: Thursday, October 1, 2009, 5:00 p.m.
The Colorado Supreme Court will conduct a hearing on a proposed new version of the Colorado Code of Judicial Conduct. The hearing will occur on Thursday, October 22, 2009, at 1:30 p.m., in the Colorado Supreme Court Courtroom, 2 E. 14th Ave., Denver, Colorado.
The Court also requests written public comments by any interested person on the proposed Code. An original and eight copies of the written comments should be submitted to Susan J. Festag, Clerk of the Supreme Court, 2 E.14th Ave., Denver, CO 80203, no later than 5:00 p.m. on Thursday, October 1, 2009. Persons wishing to participate at the hearing should notify Ms. Festag no later than Thursday, October 1, 2009. The Clerk will post written comments, as they are received, on the Colorado Supreme Court's website.
The proposed new Code of Judicial Conduct is set forth below in a clean, non-redlined version. It also is available on the court's website at www.courts.state.co.us/Courts/Supreme_Court/Rule_Changes.cfm. The proposed new Code is modeled on the ABA Model Code of Judicial Conduct, approved by the House of Delegates in 2007. A redlined version reflecting changes to and differences from the ABA Model Code is available on the Court's website at www.courts.state.co.us/Courts/Supreme_Court/Committees/Committee.cfm/Committee_ID/31.
By the Court:
Michael L. BenderJustice, Colorado Supreme Court
[Proposed] Colorado Code of Judicial ConductEffective January 1, 2010
[1] An independent, fair and impartial judiciary is indispensable to our system of justice. The United States legal system is based upon the principle that an independent, impartial, and competent judiciary, composed of men and women of integrity, will interpret and apply the law that governs our society. Thus, the judiciary plays a central role in preserving the principles of justice and the rule of law. Inherent in all the Rules contained in this Code are the precepts that judges, individually and collectively, must respect and honor the judicial office as a public trust and strive to maintain and enhance confidence in the legal system.
[2] Judges should maintain the dignity of judicial office at all times, and avoid both impropriety and the appearance of impropriety in their professional and personal lives. They should aspire at all times to conduct that ensures the greatest possible public confidence in their independence, impartiality, integrity, and competence.
[3] The Colorado Code of Judicial Conduct establishes standards for the ethical conduct of judges and judicial candidates. It is not intended as an exhaustive guide for the conduct of judges and judicial candidates, who are governed in their judicial and personal conduct by general ethical standards as well as by the Code. The Code is intended, however, to provide guidance and assist judges in maintaining the highest standards of judicial and personal conduct, and to provide a basis for regulating their conduct through disciplinary agencies.
[1] The Colorado Code of Judicial Conduct consists of four Canons, numbered Rules under each Canon, and Comments that generally follow and explain each Rule. Scope and Terminology sections provide additional guidance in interpreting and applying the Code. An Application section establishes when the various Rules apply to a judge or judicial candidate.
[2] The Canons state overarching principles of judicial ethics that all judges must observe. Although a judge may be disciplined only for violating a Rule, the Canons provide important guidance in interpreting the Rules. Where a Rule contains a permissive term, such as "may" or "should," the conduct being addressed is committed to the personal and professional discretion of the judge or candidate in question, and no disciplinary action should be taken for action or inaction within the bounds of such discretion.
[3] The Comments that accompany the Rules serve two functions. First, they provide guidance regarding the purpose, meaning, and proper application of the Rules. They contain explanatory material and, in some instances, provide examples of permitted or prohibited conduct. Comments neither add to nor subtract from the binding obligations set forth in the Rules. Therefore, when a Comment contains the term "must," it does not mean that the Comment itself is binding or enforceable; it signifies that the Rule in question, properly understood, is obligatory as to the conduct at issue.
[4] Second, the Comments identify aspirational goals for judges. To implement fully the principles of this Code as articulated in the Canons, judges should strive to exceed the standards of conduct established by the Rules, holding themselves to the highest ethical standards and seeking to achieve those aspirational goals, thereby enhancing the dignity of the judicial office.
[5] The Rules of the Colorado Code of Judicial Conduct are rules of reason that should be applied consistent with constitutional requirements, statutes, other court rules, and decisional law, and with due regard for all relevant circumstances. The Rules should not be interpreted to impinge upon the essential independence of judges in making judicial decisions.
[6] Although the black letter of the Rules is binding and enforceable, it is not contemplated that every transgression will result in the imposition of discipline. Whether discipline should be imposed should be determined through a reasonable and reasoned application of the Rules, and should depend upon factors such as the seriousness of the transgression, the facts and circumstances that existed at the time of the transgression, the extent of any pattern of improper activity, whether there have been previous violations, and the effect of the improper activity upon the judicial system or others.
[7] The Code is not designed or intended as a basis for civil or criminal liability. Neither is it intended to be the basis for litigants to seek collateral remedies against each other.
By expressing approval of the canons of ethics, the supreme court did not enact them into law. In re Petition of Colo. Bar Ass'n, 137 Colo. 357, 325 P.2d 932 (1958).
Nevertheless, they are recognized as principles...
To continue reading
Request your trial