Rule 50 CERTIORARI TO COURT OF APPEALS BEFORE JUDGMENT.

• Jurisdiction: Colorado

Rule 50. Certiorari to Court of Appeals Before Judgment.

(a) Considerations Governing. A petition for writ of certiorari from the supreme court to review a case newly filed or pending in the court of appeals, before judgment is given in said court, may be granted upon a showing that:

(1) the case involves a matter of substance not yet determined by the supreme court of Colorado, or that the case if decided according to the relief sought on appeal involves the overruling of a previous decision of the supreme court; or

(2) the court of appeals is being asked to decide an important state question which has not been, but should be, determined by the supreme court; or

(3) the case is of such imperative public importance as to justify the deviation from normal appellate processes and to require immediate determination in the supreme court.

(b) By Whom Sought. The petition for a writ of certiorari may be filed by either party or by stipulation of the parties. The court of appeals on its own motion may request transfer to the supreme court, or the supreme court may on its own motion require transfer of the case to it.

(c) Applicability. This rule does not permit certiorari review in cases pending in the district court on appeal from the county court before judgment is entered in the district court.

Source: Entire rule amended and effective June 23, 2014; entire rule amended and effective June 7, 2018, effective July 1, 2018.

Cross references: For general considerations governing review of certiorari, see C.A.R. 49; for certification and transfer of cases, see §§13-4-109 and 13-4-110, C.R.S.

ANNOTATION

Law reviews. For article, "A Summary of Colorado Supreme Court Internal Operating Procedures", see 11 Colo. Law. 356 (1982). For comment, "In the Interest of R.C., Minor Child: The Colorado Artificial Insemination by Donor Statute and the Non-Traditional Family", see 67 Den. U.L. Rev. 79 (1990).

Procedure provides for appellate review. The procedure established in §13-4-108 (2), C.R.S., and in C.A.R. 50 through C.A.R. 57, C.A.R., clearly provides for appellate review in the supreme court. Bill Dreiling Motor Co. v. Court of Appeals, 171 Colo. 448, 468 P.2d 37 (1970).

And is constitutional. The changes brought about by pertinent statutes with respect to the jurisdiction of the supreme court and the court of appeals are within the authority of the general assembly. Bill Dreiling Motor Co. v. Court of Appeals, 171 Colo. 448, 468 P.2d 37 (1970).

Review similar to...