- The 2001 Act, of 2010 action/inaction options in DC, and the 2011 reinstatement of the estate tax, presented by John Garland of Engel & Reiman PC;
- Testamentary planning (drafting, notifying clients, etc.), presented by Mike Stiff of Stiff & Associates, LLC;
- Inter vivos planning (titling, gifting, etc.), presented by Jim Ingraham of Zisman and Ingraham, P.C.;
- Generation-skipping taxes, presented by Thomas L. Stover of Stover & Spitz LLC;
- Carryover basis implications, presented byTed Atlass of Atlass Professional Corporation; and
- Dealing with deaths in 2010, presented by Kevin Millard of Chorney & Millard LLP.
The Colorado Supreme Court distinguished the meaning of “voidable” from “void” in Lake Canal Reservoir Co. v. Beethe, a treasurer’s deed challenge in Weld County. The case, which arose in 2003, stemmed from a dispute over how two adjacent land tracts should be taxed and later evolved into a question of the validity of a treasurer’s deed.
Writing the opinion for the court, Justice Allison H. Eid noted that:
. . . the line between a void and a voidable tax deed does not depend on the nature of the evidence used to determine the deed’s defect, but rather on the nature of the defect itself. When a defect goes to the jurisdiction or authority of the taxing entity, that defect will render a deed void. . . . In [Beethe], the defects –- errors in assessment, notice, and description –- challenge the manner in which the deed was issued but do not challenge Weld County’s jurisdiction or authority to tax the property or to issue the deed. We therefore hold that the treasurer’s deed was voidable, rather than void.
Because Lake Canal Reservoir Co. brought its claim against the Beethes after the statutes of limitations had tolled, the attempt to void the treasurer’s deed was time barred, and the case was remanded for additional proceedings.
Photo via Flickr, by umjanedoan
The Eleventh Judicial District — composed of Chaffee, Custer, Fremont, and Park counties – is the latest court system in Colorado to accept Visa, MasterCard, and debit cards online, enabling users to make payments any day of the week, nearly round the clock, at their convenience.
According to Chief Judge Charles M. Barton:
We decided to begin accepting credit card payments as a convenience to the community. We are hopeful that providing people with the ability to pay court fines and fees online with credit cards will help them make payments in a timely manner without havign to come to the courthouse.
Most fees, fines, and restitution are eligible for online payment. Suppressed cases, cases involving active warrants or payment delinquency, and juvenile cases are ineligible for online payment.
Click here (.pdf) for more information about the online payment system.