ARTICLE 51 DECLARATORY JUDGMENTS
| Jurisdiction | Colorado |
Law reviews: For article, "Declaratory Judgment Actions to Resolve Insurance Coverage Questions", see 18 Colo. Law. 2299 (1989).
13-51-101. Short title.
13-51-102. Legislative declaration.
13-51-103. Definitions.
13-51-104. Interpretation and construction.
13-51-105. Power and force of declaration.
13-51-106. Who may obtain declaration.
13-51-107. Contract construed any time.
13-51-108. Purposes of declaration.
13-51-109. Not a limitation.
13-51-110. When court may refuse.
13-51-111. Review.
13-51-112. Further relief.
13-51-113. Issues of fact.
13-51-114. Costs.
13-51-115. Parties - ordinances - statutes.
■ 13-51-101. Short title. This article shall be known and may be cited as the "Uniform Declaratory Judgments Law".
Source: L. 23: p. 271, § 16. CSA: C. 93, § 92. CRS 53: § 77-11-15. C.R.S. 1963: § 77-11-15.
Cross references: For declaratory judgments generally, see also C.R.C.P. 57.
Law reviews. For note, "The Colorado Declaratory Judgment Act", see 1 Rocky Mt. L. Rev. 52 (1928). For article, "Twenty-six Years Under the Colorado Declaratory Judgments Act", see 27 Dicta 177 (1950). For article, "Trusts and Estates", see 30 Dicta 435 (1953).
For constitutionality of the declaratory judgment act, see San Luis Power & Water Co. v. Trujillo, 93 Colo. 385, 26 P.2d 537 (1933).
This article is designed to afford parties relief from uncertainty with respect to their rights and status under law. Silverstein v. Sisters of Charity, 38 Colo. App. 286, 559 P.2d 716 (1976); Mt. Emmons Mining Co. v. Town of Crested Butte, 690 P.2d 231 (Colo. 1984).
This article is to be liberally construed and administered. Silverstein v. Sisters of Charity, 38 Colo. App. 286, 559 P.2d 716 (1976); Mt. Emmons Mining Co. v. Town of Crested Butte, 690 P.2d 231 (Colo. 1984); Trinen v. City & County of Denver, 725 P.2d 65 (Colo. App. 1986).
Who may seek judicial determination of rights. One whose rights are favorably affected by a statute is entitled to seek a judicial determination thereof so long as the court is provided with a properly adverse context. Silverstein v. Sisters of Charity, 38 Colo. App. 286, 559 P.2d 716 (1976).
One whose rights or status may be affected by statute is entitled to have any question of construction determined provided that a substantial controversy between adverse parties of sufficient immediacy to warrant the issuance of a declaratory judgment exists. Silverstein v. Sisters of Charity, 38 Colo. App. 286, 559 P.2d 716 (1976).
Prerequisites to jurisdiction such as exhaustion of remedies apply when a party seeks declaratory relief from agency action. City & County of Denver v. United Air Lines, Inc., 8 P.3d 1206 (Colo. 2000).
Burden on moving party in summary judgment on constitutional issues in context of declaratory judgment. Party seeking declaratory relief must demonstrate challenged statute or ordinance will cause tangible detriment to its activities and that statute or ordinance is unconstitutional beyond a reasonable doubt. Mt. Emmons Mining Co. v. Town of Crested Butte, 690 P.2d 231 (Colo. 1984).
Time limitations of appeal process cannot be circumvented by attempting to obtain declaratory relief. Trinen v. City & County of Denver, 725 P.2d 65 (Colo. App. 1986).
This statute neither expands nor contracts the jurisdiction of Colorado's courts. In creating a new remedy the general assembly did not by implication grant political subdivisions of the state the right to sue the state. Romer v. Fountain Sanitation Dist., 898 P.2d 37 (Colo. 1995); City & County of Denver v. United Air Lines, Inc., 8 P.3d 1206 (Colo. 2000).
Applied in Bd. of County Comm'rs v. Fifty-first Gen. Ass'y, 198 Colo. 302, 599 P.2d 887 (1979); Citizens for Free Enter. v. Dept. of Rev., 649 P.2d 1054 (Colo. 1982); Denver & R. G. W. R. R. v. City & County of Denver, 673 P.2d 354 (Colo. 1983).
■ 13-51-102. Legislative declaration. This article is declared to be remedial; its purpose is to settle and to afford relief from uncertainty and insecurity with respect to rights, status, and other legal relations; and it is to be liberally construed and administered.
Source: L. 23: p. 270, § 12. CSA: C. 93, § 89. CRS 53: § 77-11-12. C.R.S. 1963: § 77-11-12.
Law reviews. For article, "Twenty-six Years Under the Colorado Declaratory Judgments Act", see 27 Dicta 177 (1950).
The purpose of the statute and the rule is to be remedial and to afford relief from uncertainty and insecurity. The statute and rule expressly provide that they be liberally construed and administered. Colo. State Bd. of Optometric Exam'rs v. Dixon, 165 Colo. 488, 440 P.2d 287 (1968).
This article is designed to afford parties relief from uncertainty with respect to their rights and status under law. Silverstein v. Sisters of Charity, 38 Colo. App. 286, 559 P.2d 716 (1976).
Liberal construction makes this section applicable to decisions to be made by board or commission. A liberal construction of the statute and the rule rejects the proposition that a person adversely affected by a statute and seeking relief from uncertainty and insecurity with respect to his rights by reason of a statute or a rule of a board or commission must take the risk of prosecutions, fines, imprisonment, loss of property, or loss of profession in order to secure adjudication of his rights. Colo. State Bd. of Optometric Exam'rs v. Dixon, 165 Colo. 488, 440 P.2d 287 (1968).
This article is to be liberally construed and administered. Silverstein v. Sisters of Charity, 38 Colo. App. 286, 559 P.2d 716 (1976).
Who may seek judicial determination of rights. One whose rights are favorably affected by a statute is entitled to seek a judicial determination thereof so long as the court is provided with a properly adverse context. Silverstein v. Sisters of Charity, 38 Colo. App. 286, 559 P.2d 716 (1976).
One whose rights or status may be affected by statute is entitled to have any question of construction determined provided that a substantial controversy between adverse parties of sufficient immediacy to warrant the issuance of a declaratory judgment exists. Silverstein v. Sisters of Charity, 38 Colo. App. 286, 559 P.2d 716 (1976); Buckley Powder Co. v. State, 924 P.2d 1133 (Colo. App. 1996), aff'd in part and rev'd in part on other grounds, 945 P.2d 841 (Colo. 1997).
This statute neither expands nor contracts the jurisdiction of Colorado's courts. In creating a new remedy the general assembly did not by implication grant political subdivisions of the state the right to sue the state. Romer v. Fountain Sanitation Dist., 898 P.2d 37 (Colo. 1995).
Declaratory judgment action is an appropriate means of testing the validity of a decree and resolving uncertainty as to the legal rights and status of the parties, even if the controversy has not yet ripened into litigation. In re Lockwood, 857 P.2d 557 (Colo. App. 1993).
Trial court properly exercised its jurisdiction to review a Wyoming dissolution decree where the marital status of the parties was at issue and could be speedily and efficiently resolved through a declaratory judgment action. In re Lockwood, 857 P.2d 557 (Colo. App. 1993).
Applied in Toncray v. Dolan, 197 Colo. 382, 593 P.2d 956 (1979); Citizens Progressive Alliance v. S.W. Water Conservation Dist., 97 P.3d 308 (Colo. App. 2004).
■ 13-51-103. Definitions. As used in this article, unless the context otherwise requires:
(1) "Person" means any person, partnership, joint stock company, unincorporated association, or society, or municipal or other corporation of any character whatsoever.
Source: L. 23: p. 271, § 13. CSA: C. 93, § 90. CRS 53: § 77-11-13. C.R.S. 1963: § 77-11-13.
■ 13-51-104. Interpretation and construction. This article shall be so interpreted and construed as to effectuate its general purpose to make uniform the law of those states which enact it and to harmonize, as far as possible, with federal laws and regulations on the subject of declaratory judgments and decrees.
Source: L. 23: p. 271, § 15. CSA: C. 93, § 91. CRS 53: § 77-11-14. C.R.S. 1963: § 77-11-14.
■ 13-51-105. Power and force of declaration. Courts of record within their respective jurisdictions have power to declare rights, status, and other legal relations whether or not further relief is or could be claimed. No action or proceeding shall be open to objection on the ground that a declaratory judgment or decree is prayed for. The declaration may be either affirmative or negative in form and effect; and such declarations shall have the force and effect of a final judgment or decree.
Source: L. 23: p. 268, § 1. CSA: C. 93, § 78. CRS 53: § 77-11-1. C.R.S. 1963: § 77-11-1.
Declaratory judgment is conclusive as to questions raised by parties and passed upon by court. Atchison v. City of Englewood, 180 Colo. 407, 506 P.2d 140 (1973).
Declaratory judgment does not constitute absolute bar to subsequent proceedings where parties are seeking other remedies, even though based upon claims which could have been asserted in original action. Atchison v. City of Englewood, 180 Colo. 407, 506 P.2d 140 (1973); Near v. Calkins, 946 P.2d 537 (Colo. App. 1997).
The judgment leaves the parties to pursue the remedies which the law provides, after performing its office of declaring the existence of a certain liability. San Luis Power & Water Co. v. Trujillo, 93 Colo. 385, 26 P.2d 537 (1933).
Declaratory judgment on contract validity held not res judicata in subsequent action for reformation, rescission, and damages. Atchison v. City of Englewood, 180 Colo. 407, 506 P.2d 140 (1973).
Judgment is res judicata as to questions of statutory construction raised between the parties. Preventive relief in some instances is just as properly a matter of judicial function as remedial relief and if given by a declaratory order in the construction of a statute, it is res judicata as to the questions of construction raised between the parties and passed upon. San Luis Power & Water Co. v. Trujillo, 93 Colo. 385, 26...
To continue reading
Request your trial