Chapter 23 - § 23.5 • PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITIES

• Jurisdiction: Colorado

§ 23.5 • PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITIES

In order to modify the allocation of parental responsibilities, the moving party must file a motion requesting such modification, accompanied by affidavit as provided in C.R.S. § 14-10-132, and mail a true copy of the modification motion to the opposing party or serve the opposing party's counsel if the party is represented. No personal service is required. After the modification motion is filed, the responding party may file a response, and the moving party may then file a reply pursuant to C.R.C.P. 121, § 1-15. After reviewing these filings, the court will then notify the parties, often by issuance of a post-decree case management order, of the court's procedures applicable to post-decree matters, including how and when an evidentiary hearing will be set and if mediation will be required before a hearing is set.

The court is authorized to modify an order regarding parental responsibilities whenever such a modification would serve the best interests of the child. C.R.S. §§ 14-10-131 and -129 provide standards for the court to apply when presented with a motion for modification of decision-making or parenting time. A long line of cases further clarifies and interprets the modification standard to be applied in various circumstances. In re Marriage of Newell, 192 P.2d 529 (Colo. App. 2008) (decision-making and parenting time); In re Marriage of Rozzi, 190 P.3d 815 (Colo. App. 2008) (decision-making); In re Marriage of DeZalia, 151 P.3d 647 (Colo. App. 2006) (parenting time/relocation); In re Marriage of Ciesluk, 113 P.3d 135 (Colo. 2005) (parenting time/relocation); In re Marriage of Stewart, 43 P.3d 740 (Colo. App. 2002) (decision-making); In re Marriage of Chatten, 967 P.2d 206 (Colo. App. 1998) (decision-making); In re Marriage of McNamara, 962 P.2d 330 (Colo. App. 1998) (decision-making).

C.R.S. § 14-10-131 provides that the court shall not modify an order allocating decision-making responsibility unless the court finds that a change has occurred in the circumstances of the child or party to whom decision-making responsibility was allocated and that the modification is necessary to serve the best interests of the child. The statute further provides that the prior allocation shall remain in place unless one of the following circumstances exists:

1) The parties agreed to the modification;
2) The child has been integrated into the family of the petitioner with the consent of the other party and such situation warrants a

...