December 17, 2017

Tenth Circuit: Jury Instructions Sufficient to Apprise Jury of Elements of Crime

The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals issued its opinion in United States v. Wright on Tuesday, February 21, 2017.

Bruce Carlton Wright was convicted on one count of conspiracy to commit bank fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1349 and 1344, and on eleven counts of bank fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1344. Wright was sentenced to thirty-three months imprisonment and ordered to pay restitution to the bank involved. Wright appealed, claiming the district court erred by: (1) not including intent to defraud as an element of conspiracy to commit bank fraud in the jury instruction; (2) responding to a written question from the jury by directing the jury to consider each count of the indictment separately; (3) denying Wright’s motion for new trial based on a Brady violation; (4) improperly calculating of the bank’s loss amount under USSG § 2B1.1(b)(1); and (5) improperly calculating of the restitution amount.

Because Wright did not properly object during his original trial in relation to his first, second, fourth, and fifth claims on appeal, the court reviewed them under the plain-error standard, which requires a plaintiff to establish an “error, that is plain, which affects substantial rights, and seriously effects the fairness, integrity, or public reputation of judicial proceedings.” The court stated that a plain error affects a defendant’s substantial rights if there is a reasonable probability that, if the error had not occurred, the result of the proceeding would have been different.

Concerning Wright’s first claim, that the court erred by not including the necessary element of intent to defraud to convict on a charge of conspiracy to commit bank fraud in the jury instruction, the court reviewed the jury instructions in light of the context of the entire trial to see if the instructions accurately stated the law and provided the jury with a correct understanding of the facts of the case. The court rejected this claim, saying that Wright could not show error because, while the court did not list intent to defraud in the instruction, the omission was cured because the instruction relating to committing bank fraud did incorporate “intent to defraud” by requiring an agreement to commit bank fraud.

During deliberations, the jury asked the judge if it they had to find Wright guilty on count 1 in order to convict him on any of the subsequent counts. Over objection of counsel, who agreed with the legal answer provided by the court but requested different phrasing, the judge responded, “No, you must consider each count separately.” On appeal, Wright contends that the answer should have been “Yes,” because, citing Pinkerton v. United States, the conviction would have been based on the acts of a co-conspirator and not his own acts (as his co-conspirator was testifying at his trial). The court stated that Wright had waived his ability to assert error under Pinkerton by failing to object on that basis at the district court level.  Instead, because Wright had generally objected to the instruction, the court reviews for plain error. However, because Wright argued under an abuse of discretion, and not plain error he waived his right to argue the claim.

In support for his motion for new trial, Wright argued that the government withheld a victim impact statement that the bank president had prepared for his coconspirator’s sentencing. Wright claimed that the information would have helped him to impeach his co-conspirator at his own trial. In their assessment of Wright’s motion, the court stated that Wright would have to show the prosecution suppressed material evidence that was favorable to Wright.  While the court determined the statement was not given to Wright prior to the trial, and that it was favorable to him, he failed in showing that the information included in the impact statement was material enough that it could have undermined confidence in the outcome of the case because Wright already attacked his co-conspirator’s credibility extensively at trial.

In calculating Wright’s sentence and amount of restitution he would be required to pay to the victims, the district court looked to the amount of Wright’s fraudulent draw requests, and determined he owed to be $1,094, 490. Wright was provided the sum in the presentencing report, which he accepted. Because the Bank recovered sums due to its sale, the sales price should be subtracted from the outstanding loan balance to calculate restitution to avoid a windfall to the victim. However, because the amount of restitution and sentence is a factual question, Wright was required to object at the district court level for it to rise to the level of a plain error reviewable on appeal. Wright accepted the amount in the pre-sentencing report, and the court held that Wright had accepted the calculation of restitution and his sentence as correct.

The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court’s rejection of Wright’s motion for new trial and rejected Wright’s other claims as to the amount and length of his sentence.

Tenth Circuit: Summary Judgment Not Appropriate when Questions of Fact Remain over Contract Dispute

The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals published its opinion in Obermeyer Hydro Accessories, Inc. v. CSI Calendaring, Inc. on Thursday, March 30, 2017.

Obermeyer Hydro Accessories, Inc. purchased fabric sheets used for water control structures from CSI Calendering, Inc. beginning in 2010. The parties’ dispute arose from a January 2013 quote for the product. The quote was a 50% increase from the parties’ earlier transactions. The parties agree that they had a contract, but they disagree on when it was formed. The district court granted summary judgment to CSI and Obermeyer appealed.

Obermeyer contends that the contract was formed before the January quote. “CSI contends that the contract was not formed until the January quote and that even if the parties had a prior contract, the contract was modified (1) by the quote or (2) by Obermeyer” making numerous payments invoiced at the price from the January quote. The Tenth Circuit held that a jury could find that a contract was formed before the January quote, and questions of fact remain as to the whether the contract was modified by the January quote or Obermeyer’s subsequent payments. Therefore, summary judgment was not appropriate.

The Tenth Circuit reviewed the grant of summary judgment de novo. The court applied Texas law as the governing law of the agreement, as agreed to by the parties. The Tenth Circuit applied the six elements under Texas law “needed to form a valid and binding contract.” The court reviewed the circumstances of what the parties said and did objectively to determine whether there was a meeting of the minds. Because “there was no evidence that CSI had ever suggested before January 11 that timing of invoices would affect the price,” a jury could reasonably find that the price was offered and accepted before the January quote.

The court then addressed CSI’s arguments that even if the contract was formed before the January quote that it was modified, and therefore CSI is entitled to summary judgment. “Modification requires mutual consent, which is ordinarily a question of fact for the jury.” The party asserting modification has the burden to prove modification by establishing notice of the change and acceptance. The other party must have knowledge of the nature of the change. Further, “Texas law requires that modification of a contract for the sale of goods must be made in objective and subjective good faith.”

CSI did not meet its burden. CSI did not explicitly state that it was changing the price, nor did it explain to Obermeyer its reason for the modification as required to establish objective good faith. CSI asserted that the change in price was made clear in the January quote by the use of the term turnkey. However, “CSI never explained to Obermeyer how it was using the term turnkey and the term had never before been used in their dealings.” Additionally, Obermeyer could have made natural assumptions not indicative of a massive change in pricing. Here, the court stated that “the specifics of the purported change smack of fast dealing.” And that, “on this record a jury could reasonably reject CSI’s explanation.”

The court determined that the question of modification by performance was also a question for the jury. Under the UCC performance requires that the other party have “knowledge of the nature of the performance.” CSI argued both that Obermeyer should-have-known, and the doctrine of negligent assent to support modification. Here, questions remain as to whether Obermeyer’s payments reflected its understanding of the change in price, which is a question for the jury.

Finally, CSI contended that commercial transactions would suffer from uncertainty in a decision against it. The court responded, “commerce is not enhanced if buyers and sellers must always treat each other as adversaries, auditing every transaction as it occurs to be sure the other party is not cheating. If the jury finds that Obermeyer had been misled by an unscrupulous supplier on which it had relied in good fact, we do not think that the world of commerce will suffer.”

The court REVERSED the summary judgment and REMANDED for further proceedings.

Colorado Court of Appeals: Plaintiff Need Only Demonstrate Prima Facie Showing of Personal Jurisdiction to Defeat Rule 12(b) Motion to Dismiss

The Colorado Court of Appeals issued its opinion in Rome v. Reyes on Thursday, June 15, 2017.

Ponzi Scheme—Investments—Insurance—Fraud—Personal Jurisdiction—Long Arm Statute—Colorado Securities Act—C.R.C.P. 12(b)(2)—C.R.C.P. 9(b).

This case arises out of a Ponzi scheme that defrauded at least 255 investors out of $15.25 million dollars. To implement the scheme, Schnorenberg formed KJS Marketing, Inc. in Colorado to obtain funds for investment in insurance and financial products sales companies. Schnorenberg hired Reyes, a California resident, and Kahler, a Wyoming resident, to solicit investor funds on behalf of KJS and its successor company, James Marketing. Rome, the Securities Commissioner for the State of Colorado, brought claims against Schnorenberg, Reyes, and Kahler for securities fraud, offer and sale of unregistered securities, and unlicensed sales representative activity. The Commissioner also sought a constructive trust or equitable lien against Schnorenberg’s mother (among others), who resides in Wyoming, as a “relief defendant,” based on allegations that she received some of the improperly invested funds. Reyes, Kahler, and Schnorenberg’s mother moved to dismiss all claims against them under C.R.C.P. 12(b)(2) for lack of jurisdiction. Reyes and Kahler also sought dismissal of the securities fraud claim on the ground that it failed to meet the C.R.C.P. 9(b) particularity requirements. (Neither Schnorenberg nor KJS is a party to this appeal.) The district court granted all of these motions without conducting an evidentiary hearing. In written orders, the court concluded that it lacked personal jurisdiction over each of the nonresident defendants, and that the Commissioner’s securities fraud claim failed to “link any particular factual allegations to actual false representations” made by Reyes or Kahler.

On appeal, the Commissioner contended that the district court erred in dismissing the claims against Reyes, Kahler, and Schnorenberg’s mother for lack of personal jurisdiction. Here, the Commissioner sufficiently alleged that Reyes and Kahler violated the Colorado Securities Act (CSA) because the transactions at issue pertained to securities that originated in Colorado. Taking the allegations together, the activities of Reyes and Kahler made it reasonably foreseeable that they could be haled into a Colorado court to answer the allegations. Further, the exercise of jurisdiction over them does not offend due process principles. Schnorenberg’s mother received funds from her son that had been transferred from Colorado accounts, and she knew or should have known that the money came from investors in her son’s “Colorado-based investment scheme.” The Commissioner’s action against Schnorenberg’s mother arises from her activities’ consequences in Colorado, and it is reasonable to exercise jurisdiction over her, despite the somewhat limited nature of her direct contacts with Colorado.

The Commissioner also argued that the district court erred in dismissing the claims against Reyes and Kahler under the CSA on the ground that the Commissioner failed to meet his pleading burden under Rule 9(b). The Commissioner’s complaint provided sufficient particularity to give Reyes and Kahler fair notice of the claim for securities fraud and the main facts or incidents upon which it is based.

The judgment was reversed and the case was remanded.

Summary provided courtesy of The Colorado Lawyer.

Comment Period Open for Reappointment of Federal Bankruptcy Judge Michael E. Romero

The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals announced that Federal Bankruptcy Judge Michael E. Romero’s 14-year term of office will expire on December 21, 2017. The court is considering whether to reappoint Judge Romero for a new 14-year term of office. Under a new appointment, Judge Romero would continue to exercise jurisdiction as a bankruptcy judge under Titles 11 and 28 of the United States Code.

Comments about Judge Romero’s reappointment are now being accepted by the Tenth Circuit. All comments will be kept confidential. Comments should be mailed to

David Tighe
Circuit Executive
Byron White United States Courthouse
1823 Stout Street
Denver, CO 80257

and must be received no later than July 21, 2017. For more information about the reappointment, click here.

Bills Signed Adding Water Right for Industrial Hemp, Amending Collections of Delinquent Taxes on Mobile Homes, Changing Election Laws, and More Signed

Though the legislative session is over, the governor continues to sign bills. He signed two bills on Friday, May 19; three bills on Saturday, May 20; three bills on Sunday, May 21; six bills on Monday, May 22; six bills on Tuesday, May 23; four bills on Wednesday, May 24; 28 bills on Thursday, May 25; one bill on Friday, May 26; and one bill on Tuesday, May 30. To date, the governor has signed 285 bills and vetoed one bill this legislative session. The bills signed since May 19 are summarized here.

Friday, May 19, 2017

  • HB 17-1354“Concerning the Collection of Delinquent Taxes on Certain Mobile Homes,” by Rep. KC Becker and Sens. John Kefalas & Kevin Priola. The bill modifies the county treasurer’s duties in connection with the collection of delinquent taxes on mobile or manufactured homes that are not affixed to the ground.
  • SB 17-305“Concerning Modifications to Select Statutory Provisions Affecting Primary Elections Enacted by Voters at the 2016 Statewide General Election to Facilitate the Effective Implementation of the State’s Election Laws, and, in Connection Therewith, Making an Appropriation,” by Sens. Stephen Fenberg & Kevin Lundberg and Reps. Patrick Neville & Mike Foote.

Saturday, May 20, 2017

  • HB 17-1113“Concerning Electronic Participation in Committee Meetings During the Legislative Interim,” by Reps. Yeulin Willett & Jeni Arndt and Sen. Ray Scott. The bill gives the executive committee of the legislative council the ability to consider, recommend, and establish policies regarding electronic participation by senators or representatives in committee meetings during the legislative interim.
  • HB 17-1258“Concerning Renaming Delta-Montrose Technical College to Technical College of the Rockies,” by Reps. Millie Hamner & Yeulin Willett and Sens. Kerry Donovan & Don Coram. The bill changes the name of ‘Delta-Montrose Technical College’ to ‘Technical College of the Rockies’.
  • SB 17-280“Concerning Extending the Repeal Date of the Colorado Economic Development Commission, and, in Connection Therewith, Making an Appropriation,” by Sen. Jack Tate and Reps. Dan Thurlow & Tracy Kraft-Tharp. The bill extends the Colorado economic development commission by changing the repeal date of its organic statute to July 1, 2025.

Sunday, May 21, 2017

  • HB 17-1003“Concerning a Strategic Action Plan to Address Teacher Shortages in Colorado,” by Rep. Barbara McLaughlin and Sen. Don Coram. The bill requires the Department of Higher Education in partnership with the Department of Education to examine recruitment, preparation, and retention of teachers and to prepare a strategic plan to address teacher shortages in school districts and public schools within the state.
  • HB 17-1077“Concerning the Useful Public Service Cash Fund,” by Rep. Donald Valdez and Sen. Don Coram. The bill creates the useful public service cash fund in the judicial branch to facilitate the administration of programs that supervise the performance of useful public service by persons who are required to perform such service pursuant to a criminal sentence.
  • SB 17-117“Concerning Confirmation that Industrial Hemp is a Recognized Agricultural Product for Which a Person with a Water Right Decreed for Agricultural Use may Use the Water Subject to the Water Right for Industrial Hemp Cultivation,” by Sen. Don Coram and Reps. Donald Valdez & Marc Catlin. The bill confirms that a person with an absolute or conditional water right decreed for agricultural use may use the water subject to the water right for the growth or cultivation of industrial hemp if the person is registered by the Department of Agriculture to grow industrial hemp for commercial or research and development purposes.

Monday, May 22, 2017

  • HB 17-1104“Concerning the Exclusion from State Taxable Income of the Monetary Value of any Medal Won by an Athlete while Competing for the United States of America at the Olympic Games, so long as the Athlete’s Federal Adjusted Gross Income does not Exceed a Specified Amount,” by Rep. Clarice Navarro and Sen. Kevin Priola. The bill specifies that for the purpose of determining the state income tax liability of an individual, income earned as a direct result of winning a medal while competing for the United States of America at the olympic games is excluded from state taxable income.
  • HB 17-1283“Concerning the Creation of a Task Force to Examine Workforce Resiliency in the Child Welfare System,” by Reps. Jonathan Singer & Dan Nordberg and Sens. John Cooke & Leroy Garcia. The bill creates a task force to organize county-level versions of and guidelines for child welfare caseworker resiliency programs modeled on national resiliency programs.
  • HB 17-1289“Concerning a Requirement that the State Engineer Promulgate Rules that Establish an Optional Streamlined Approach to Calculate the Historical Consumptive Use of a Water Right,” by Reps. Donald Valdez & Chris Hansen and Sens. Larry Crowder & Don Coram. The bill directs the state engineer to promulgate rules that take into account local conditions that an applicant can use to calculate historical consumptive use.
  • SB 17-074“Concerning the Creation of a Pilot Program in Certain Areas of the State Experiencing High Levels of Opioid Addiction to Award Grants to Increase Access to Addiction Treatment, and, in Connection Therewith, Making an Appropriation,” by Sen. Leroy Garcia and Rep. Daneya Esgar. The bill reates the medication-assisted treatment (MAT) expansion pilot program, administered by the University of Colorado College of Nursing, to expand access to medication-assisted treatment to opioid-dependent patients in Pueblo and Routt counties.
  • SB 17-105“Concerning Consumers’ Right to Know their Electric Utility charges by requiring investor-owned electric utilities to provide their customers with a comprehensive breakdown of cost on their monthly bills,” by Sen. Leroy Garcia and Reps. Daneya Esgar & KC Becker. The bill requires an investor-owned electric utility to file with the public utilities commission for the commission’s review a comprehensive billing format that the investor-owned electric utility has developed for its monthly billing of customers.
  • SB 17-153“Concerning Establishment of the Southwest Chief and Front Range Passenger Rail Commission to Oversee the Preservation and Expansion of Amtrak Southwest Chief Rail Service in Colorado and Facilitate the Development and Operation of a Front Range Passenger Rail System that Provides Passenger Rail Service In and Along the Interstate 25 Corridor,” by Sens. Larry Crowder & Leroy Garcia and Rep. Daneya Esgar. The bill replaces the existing southwest chief rail line economic development, rural tourism, and infrastructure repair and maintenance commission, the current statutory authorization for which expires on July 1, 2017, with an expanded southwest chief and front range passenger rail commission.

Tuesday, May 23, 2017

  • HB 17-1248“Concerning the Funding of Colorado Water Conservation Board Projects, and, in Connection Therewith, Making Appropriations,” by Rep. Jeni Arndt and Sens. John Cooke & Jerry Sonnenberg. The bill appropriates the following amounts from the Colorado Water Conservation Board construction fund to the CWCB or the Division of Water Resources for certain projects.
  • HB 17-1279“Concerning the Requirement that a Unit Owners’ Association Obtain Approval Through a Vote of Unit Owners Before Filing a Construction Defect Action,” by Reps. Alec Garnett & Lori Saine and Sens. Lucia Guzman & Jack Tate. The bill requires that, before the executive board of a unit owners’ association (HOA) in a common interest community brings suit against a developer or builder on behalf of unit owners based on a defect in construction work not ordered by the HOA itself, the board must notify the unit owners, call a meeting of the executive board, and obtain approval of a majority of unit owners.
  • HB 17-1280“Concerning Conforming Colorado Statutory Language Related to Disability Trusts to the Federal ’21st Century Cures Act’,” by Reps. Dafna Michaelson Jenet & Dave Young and Sen. Bob Gardner. The bill conforms Colorado statutory language relating to the creation of a disability trust to conform to the language established in the federal ’21st Century Cures Act’. Specifically, it clarifies that the individual who is the beneficiary of a disability trust can also be the person who establishes such trust.
  • HB 17-1353“Concerning Implementing Medicaid Initiatives that Create Higher Value in the Medicaid Program Leading to Better Health Outcomes for Medicaid Clients, and, in Connection Therewith, Continuing the Implementation of the Accountable Care Collaborative and Authorizing Performance-based Provider Payments,” by Rep. Dave Young and Sen. Kevin Lundberg. The bill authorizes the Department of Health Care Policy and Financing to continue its implementation of the medicaid care delivery system, referred to as the accountable care collaborative (ACC).
  • SB 17-209“Concerning Access to the Ballot by Candidates,” by Sen. Kevin Priola and Rep. Mike Weissman. The bill makes various changes to the laws governing access to the ballot.
  • SB 17-232“Concerning Continuation under the Sunset Law of the Bingo-Raffle Advisory Board, and, in Connection Therewith, Implementing the Recommendations of the 2016 Sunset Report of the Department of Regulatory Agencies,” by Sen. Stephen Fenberg and Rep. Paul Rosenthal. The bill The bill implements the recommendations of the sunset review and report on the licensing of bingo and other games of chance through the Secretary of State.

Wednesday, May 24, 2017

  • HB 17-1155“Concerning the Ability to Cure Campaign Finance Reporting Deficiencies Without Penalty,” by Rep. Dan Thurlow and Sen. Bob Gardner. The bill requires the Secretary of State to give notice to the particular committee by e-mail of deficiencies alleged in a complaint pursuant to the campaign finance provisions of the state constitution or the ‘Fair Campaign Practices Act’ (FCPA).
  • HB 17-1317“Concerning the Authority of the State Historical Society to Dispose of Real Property Located on the Former Lowry Air Force Base,” by Reps. Daneya Esgar & Chris Hansen and Sens. John Kefalas & Randy Baumgardner. The bill grants the state historical society the authority to sell a vacant cold storage facility located on the former Lowry Air Force base.
  • HB 17-1342“Concerning Authorization for a County to Submit a Ballot Question for a County Public Safety Improvements Tax at a Biennial County or November Odd-year Election,” by Rep. Adrienne Benavidez and Sen. Larry Crowder. The bill authorizes a county to submit a ballot question at a biennial county election or an election held in November of an odd-numbered year.
  • HB 17-1356“Concerning the Temporary Authority of the Colorado Economic Development Commission to Allow Certain Businesses to Treat Specific Existing Income Tax Credits Differently,” by Reps. Crisanta Duran & Daneya Esgar and Sens. Leroy Garcia & Jack Tate. The bill allows the Colorado economic development commission to allow certain businesses that make a strategic capital investment in the state, subject to a maximum amount, and subject to the requirements of the specified income tax credits, to treat any of the following income tax credits allowed to the business as either carryforwardable for a five-year period or as transferable under certain circumstances.

Thursday, May 25, 2017

  • HB 17-1072: “Concerning Human Trafficking for Sexual Servitude,” by Reps. Lois Landgraf & Polly Lawrence and Sen. John Cooke. The bill amends the language defining the crime of human trafficking for sexual servitude to include that a person who knowingly advertises, offers to sell, or sells travel services that facilitate activities defined as human trafficking of a minor for sexual servitude commits the offense of human trafficking of a minor for sexual servitude. ‘Travel services’ are defined in the bill.
  • HB 17-1190“Concerning the Limited Applicability of the Colorado Supreme Court’s Decision in St. Jude’s Co. v. Roaring Fork Club, LLC, 351 P.3d 442 (Colo. 2015),” by Rep. KC Becker and Sen. Jerry Sonnenberg. The bill provides that the decision in the St. Jude’s Co. case interpreting section 37-92-103(4) does not apply to previously decreed absolute and conditional water rights or claims pending as of July 15, 2015. The interpretation of section 37-92-103 (4) in St. Jude’s Co. applies only to direct-flow appropriations, without storage, filed after July 15, 2015, for water diverted from a surface stream or tributary groundwater by a private entity for private aesthetic, recreational, and piscatorial purpose.
  • HB 17-1209“Concerning Peace Officer Designation for the Manager of the Office of Prevention and Security Within the Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management in the Department of Public Safety,” by Reps. Jovan Melton & Terri Carver and Sens. Rhonda Fields & John Cooke. The bill designates as a peace officer the manager of the office of prevention and security within the division of homeland security and emergency management in the department of public safety.
  • HB 17-1223“Concerning the Creation of a Fraud Reporting Hotline to be Administered by the State Auditor, and, in Connection Therewith, Establishing Referral and Reporting Processes and State Auditor Investigative Authority,” by Reps. Lori Saine & Tracy Kraft-Tharp and Sens. Cheri Jahn & Tim Neville. The bill requires the state auditor to establish and administer a telephone number, fax number, email address, mailing address, or internet-based form whereby any individual may report an allegation of fraud committed by a state employee or an individual acting under a contract with a state agency. This system is referred to in the bill as the ‘fraud hotline’ or ‘hotline’ and any report to the hotline as a ‘hotline call’.
  • HB 17-1238“Concerning the Nonsubstantive Relocation of Laws Related to Debt Management and Collection Services from Title 12, Colorado Revised Statutes, as Part of the Organizational Recodification of Title 12,” by Rep. Pete Lee and Sen. Chris Holbert. The bill relocates the laws related to debt management and collection services from articles 14, 14.1, 14.3, and 14.5 of title 12.
  • HB 17-1239“Concerning the Nonsubstantive Relocation of Laws Related to Private Occupational Schools from Title 12, Colorado Revised Statutes, as Part of the Organizational Recodification of Title 12,” by Rep. Cole Wist and Sen. Lucia Guzman. The bill creates a new article 64 in title 23 of the Colorado Revised Statutes and relocates the repealed provisions of article 59 of title 12 of the Colorado Revised Statutes to that article 64 and repeals article 59 of title 12 of the Colorado Revised Statutes.
  • HB 17-1240“Concerning the Nonsubstantive Relocation of the Laws Related to the Department of Public Health and Environment from Title 12, Colorado Revised Statutes, as Part of the Organizational Recodification of Title 12,” by Rep. Cole Wist and Sen. John Cooke. The bill relocates Article 29.3 of title 12 to part 6 of article 1.5 of title 25 and Article 30 of title 12 to article 48 of title 25.
  • HB 17-1243“Concerning the Nonsubstantive Relocation of the Laws Related to Wholesale Sales Representatives from Title 12, Colorado Revised Statutes, as Part of the Organizational Recodification of Title 12,” by Rep. Yeulin Willett and Sen. Lucia Guzman. The bill relocates article 66 of title 12, which relates to wholesale sales representatives, to title 13.
  • HB 17-1244: “Concerning the Nonsubstantive Relocation of the Laws Related to Cemeteries from Title 12, Colorado Revised Statutes, as Part of the Organizational Recodification of Title 12,” by Rep. Leslie Herod and Sen. Bob Gardner. The bill relocates article 12 of title 12, which relates to cemeteries, to title 6.
  • HB 17-1245“Concerning the Nonsubstantive Relocation of the Laws Related to Public Establishments from Title 12, Colorado Revised Statutes, as Part of the Organizational Recodification of Title 12,” by Rep. Mike Foote and Sen. Daniel Kagan. The bill relocates parts 1 and 3 of article 44 of title 12, which relate to public establishments, to title 6.
  • HB 17-1251“Concerning the Scheduled Repeal of Reports by Higher Education Agencies to the General Assembly,” by Rep. Dan Nordberg and Sen. Dominick Moreno. The bill addresses the reporting requirements of higher education agencies.
  • HB 17-1255: “Concerning the Scheduled Repeal of a Report by the Board of Veterans Affairs to the General Assembly,” by Rep. Dan Nordberg and Sen. Andy Kerr. The bill continues indefinitely a reporting requirement of the board of veterans affairs.
  • HB 17-1257: “Concerning the Scheduled Repeal of Reports by the Department of Natural Resources to the General Assembly,” by Rep. Jeni Arndt and Sen. Jack Tate. The bill continues indefinitely reporting requirements of the Department of Natural Resources that were scheduled to repeal according to section 24-1-136(11)(a)(I).
  • HB 17-1265“Concerning an Increase in the Total Employer Contribution for Employers in the Judicial Division of the Public Employees’ Retirement Association,” by Reps. KC Becker & Dan Nordberg and Sens. Andy Kerr & Kevin Priola. For the calendar year beginning in 2019, for the judicial division only, the bill increases the AED to 3.40% of total payroll and requires the AED payment to increase by 0.4% of total payroll at the start of each of the following 4 calendar years through 2023.
  • HB 17-1267“Concerning the Scheduled Repeal of Reports by Educational Agencies to the General Assembly,” by Rep. Jeni Arndt and Sen. Dominick Moreno. The bill addresses the reporting requirements of educational agencies.
  • HB 17-1295“Concerning the Repeal of the Governor’s Office of Marijuana Coordination,” by Rep. Bob Rankin and Sen. Dominick Moreno. The bill repeals the office of marijuana coordination, effective July 1, 2017.
  • HB 17-1298: “Concerning the Date by Which the State Personnel Director is Required to Submit the Annual Compensation Report,” by Rep. Millie Hamner and Sen. Kevin Lundberg. The bill changes the deadline for submission of the state personnel director’s annual report to September 15 of each year beginning with the 2017 report.
  • HB 17-1346“Concerning the Sale of More Than Fifteen Acres of Land at the Colorado Mental Health Institute at Fort Logan to the United States Department of Veterans Affairs for the Expansion of Fort Logan National Cemetery,” by Rep. Susan Lontine and Sen. Owen Hill. The bill grants the Department of Human Services authority to execute a land sale, at fair market value, to sell 51 additional acres, or up to 66 acres. The bill specifies that the proceeds of the sale of the additional 51 acres to the United States department of veterans affairs must be credited to the Fort Logan land sale account in the capital construction fund.
  • SB 17-222“Concerning the Nonsubstantive Relocation of the Laws Related to Fireworks from Title 12, Colorado Revised Statutes, as Part of the Organizational Recodification of Title 12,” by Sen. John Cooke and Rep. Yeulin Willett. The bill relocates article 28 of title 12, which relates to fireworks, to a new part 20 of article 33.5 of title 24, which title pertains to the department of public safety.
  • SB 17-225“Concerning the Nonsubstantive Relocation of Laws Related to Farm Products from Title 12 of the Colorado Revised Statutes as Part of the Organizational Recodification of Title 12,” by Sen. John Cooke and Rep. Yeulin Willett. The bill relocates part 2 of article 16 of title 12, the ‘Commodity Handler Act’, to article 36 of title 35; and part 1 of article 16 of title 12, the ‘Farm Products Act’, to article 37 of title 35.
  • SB 17-228“Concerning the Nonsubstantive Relocation of the Laws Related to Licenses Granted by Local Governments from Title 12, Colorado Revised Statutes, as Part of the Organizational Recodification of Title 12,” by Sen. Bob Gardner and Rep. Cole Wist. The bill relocates article 18 of title 12, which relates to dance halls, to title 30, which pertains to counties; article 25.5 of title 12, which relates to escort services, to title 29, which relates to local governments; and relocates article 56 of title 12, which relates to pawnbrokers, to title 29.
  • SB 17-242“Concerning Modernizing Terminology in the Colorado Revised Statutes Related to Behavioral Health,” by Sen. Beth Martinez Humenik and Reps. Kim Ransom & Joann Ginal. The bill updates and modernizes terminology in the Colorado Revised Statutes related to behavioral health, mental health, alcohol abuse, and substance abuse.
  • SB 17-243“Concerning the Continuation under the Sunset Law of the Motorcycle Operator Safety Training Program by the Director of the Office of Transportation Safety in the Department of Transportation, and, in Connection Therewith, Transferring the Operation of the Program to the Chief of the State Patrol Beginning in 2018,” by Sens. Nancy Todd & Randy Baumgardner and Rep. Dominique Jackson. The bill continues the motorcycle operator safety training program for 3 years, until 2020.
  • SB 17-279“Concerning Clarification of the Applicability Provisions of Recent Legislation to Promote an Equitable Financial Contribution Among Affected Public Bodies in Connection with Urban Redevelopment Projects Allocating Tax Revenues,” by Sens. Beth Martinez Humenik & Rachel Zenzinger and Reps. Matt Gray & Susan Beckman. The bill clarifies the applicability provisions of legislation enacted in 2015 and 2016 to promote an equitable financial contribution among affected public bodies in connection with urban redevelopment projects allocating tax revenues.
  • SB 17-291“Concerning Continuation of the School Safety Resource Center Advisory Board,” by Sen. Beth Martinez Humenik and Rep. Jeff Bridges. The bill implements the recommendations of the sunset review and report on the school safety resource center advisory board by eliminating the repeal date of the board and extending the board through September 1, 2022.
  • SB 17-293“Concerning Updating the Reference to a National Standard Setting Forth Certain Specifications Applicable to the Type of Paper Used to Publish the Colorado Revised Statutes,” by Sen. Daniel Kagan and Rep. Pete Lee. The bill updates the statutory reference to the current applicable alkaline minimum reserve requirements and acidity levels for uncoated paper as established by the American national standards institute and the national information standards organization.
  • SB 17-294“Concerning the Nonsubstantive Revision of Statutes in the Colorado Revised Statutes, as Amended, and, in Connection Therewith, Amending or Repealing Obsolete, Imperfect, and Inoperative Law to Preserve the Legislative Intent, Effect, and Meaning of the Law,” by Sen. Bob Gardner and Rep. Pete Lee. The bill amends, repeals, and reconstructs various statutory provisions of law that are obsolete, imperfect, or inoperative. The specific reasons for each amendment or repeal are set forth in the appendix to the bill.
  • SB 17-304“Concerning the Authority of the Joint Technology Committee,” by Sens. Angela Williams & Beth Martinez Humenik and Reps. Dan Thurlow & Jonathan Singer. The bill adds definitions of ‘cybersecurity’ and ‘data privacy’ for the purposes of the joint technology committee. In addition, the bill modifies the definition of ‘oversee’ for the purposes of the committee to be consistent with other statutory provisions.

Friday, May 26, 2017

  • SB 17-254“Concerning the Provision for Payment of the Expenses of the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial Departments of the State of Colorado, and of its Agencies and Institutions, For and During the Fiscal Year Beginning July 1, 2017, Except as Otherwise Noted,” by Sen. Kent Lambert and Rep. Millie Hamner. The bill provides for the payment of expenses of the executive, legislative, and judicial departments of the state of Colorado, and of its agencies and institutions, for and during the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2017, except as otherwise noted.

Tuesday, May 30, 2017

  • SB 17-267“Concerning the Sustainability of Rural Colorado,” by Sens. Lucia Guzman & Jerry Sonnenberg and Reps. KC Becker & Jon Becker. The bill creates a new Colorado healthcare affordability and sustainability enterprise (CHASE) within the Department of Health Care Policy and Financing (HCPF), effective July 1, 2017, to charge and collect a healthcare affordability and sustainability fee that functions similarly to the repealed hospital provider fee. Because CHASE is an enterprise for purposes of the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR), its revenue does not count against the state fiscal year spending limit.

For a list of the governor’s 2017 legislative actions, click here.

Colorado Court of Appeals: Forbearance Fees and Interest Charges on Loan Were Not Usurious

The Colorado Court of Appeals issued its opinion in Blooming Terrace No. 1, LLC v. KH Blake Street, LLC on Thursday, May 18, 2017.

Usury—Motion to Dismiss—Attorney Fees.

KH Blake Street, LLC and Kresher Holdings, LLC (collectively, lender) loaned Blooming Terrace No. 1 LLC (borrower) $11 million for an origination fee of $220,000. The loan was secured by a deed of trust and memorialized by a promissory note (note) that contained an accrual interest rate of 11% per annum, a default interest rate of 21% per annum, a 5% late charge on any late monthly payments, and an $110,000 exit fee. The note required monthly interest payments calculated at the rate of 8% per annum, with none of the monthly payments being applied to the principal.

Borrower defaulted. The parties executed a forbearance agreement whereby lender agreed to forbear from foreclosing on the deed of trust in exchange for a $110,000 forbearance fee plus continued accrual of default interest, late charges, and certain additional fees. At that time, the amount of all outstanding charges was $778,583.33. The loan was not paid when due, and the forbearance agreement was amended for $220,000. Borrower then paid off the loan, including all outstanding interest, fees, and costs.

Borrower sued lender, claiming that the fees, interest, costs, and expenses exceeded the 45% per annum interest allowable under Colorado’s usury law. Lender moved to dismiss under C.R.C.P. 12(b)(5), arguing the loan fees did not constitute interest above the maximum allowable rate. The district court agreed, concluding that the effective rate of interest was 12.924% based on the total amount of interest charged during the life of the loan. The complaint was dismissed. Lender sought attorney fees pursuant to the note, and the district court awarded attorney fees in the amount of $15,407.20 to lender.

On appeal, borrower argued that the court of appeals should annualize the forbearance charges. The district court had measured the interest charged on a purely per annum rate based on the entire amount of interest charges over the life of the loan. The court concluded that borrower’s computation would not accurately reflect the rate of interest actually charged. Although it found the district court overlooked some charges, the court agreed with the district court’s computation approach and calculated an interest rate of 17.60%. The court concluded that the interest charges were not usurious and the complaint failed to state a claim for which relief could be granted

Borrower then argued it was error to grant attorney fees, asserting that because the forbearance agreements were not loan documents, the litigation regarding those agreements was not related to any loan document. The note provided for attorney fees incurred in any litigation related to any “Loan Document.” This litigation concerned the interest charged by lender under both the note and the forbearance agreements. Therefore attorney fees were properly awarded.

Borrower further contended that the district court abused its discretion in calculating the fees awardable to lender. The court rejected this contention.

The judgment was affirmed and the case was remanded for determination of the amount of reasonable appellate attorney fees to be awarded to lender.

Summary provided courtesy of The Colorado Lawyer.

Colorado Court of Appeals: CGIA Does Not Apply to Claims by Metropolitan District Against Developers

The Colorado Court of Appeals issued its opinion in Tallman Gulch Metropolitan District v. Natureview Development, LLC on Thursday, May 18, 2017.

Colorado Governmental Immunity Act—Public Employee Immunity for Torts.

Richardson owned Natureview Development, LLC (Natureview) and platted and developed Tallman Gulch, a real estate development. In 2006, the Tallman Gulch Metropolitan District (the District) was formed to provide public improvements and services to its residents and taxpayers. Richardson was president of the District’s Board of Directors (Board). Tallman Gulch went into foreclosure, and despite being aware of the foreclosure proceedings, Richardson, acting as president of the District’s Board, signed off on the issuance of $4,214,000 in bonds to Natureview in exchange for the then-existing infrastructure improvements in Tallman Gulch. Ten days after the bonds were issued, the district court authorized the public trustee sale of Tallman Gulch, which was sold in 2011.

The District filed various claims against Natureview and Richardson, alleging it suffered an injury when it issued over $4 million in bonds to Natureview and Richardson, despite Tallman Gulch’s foreclosure status. The District argued that Richardson breached his fiduciary duty to the District as a Board member by approving issuance of bonds in a financially reckless manner and in bad faith, failing to disclose and consider the development’s financial and foreclosure status in making the bonds decision. Defendants moved to dismiss on various grounds. As relevant here, defendants argued that the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the claims against Richardson under CRCP 12(b)(1), asserting that the claims were based on Richardson’s actions as an officer of the District and were thus barred by the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act (CGIA). The court denied the motion to dismiss.

On appeal, defendants argued it was error to conclude the CGIA did not apply to the District’s claims against Richardson. Richardson argued that as a public employee he was immune under the CGIA with regard to the District’s tort claims against him. Here, the District, the public entity that employed Richardson, sued him for his malfeasance while in its employ. The plain language of the statute is unambiguous as to the immunity of the entity or employee when called upon to defend against tort claims, but it is silent as to suits brought by a public entity plaintiff. The CGIA clearly states that its purpose is to limit the liability of public entities in defending against tort claims, and thus to lessen the burden on taxpayers who provide funding for public entities. To prevent the District from recovering its loss by allowing Richardson to claim immunity as a public employee does not effectuate the purposes of the CGIA. The Court of Appeals concluded that the district court correctly concluded that the CGIA did not on its face apply to the District’s claims against Richardson.

The order was affirmed.

Summary provided courtesy of The Colorado Lawyer.

Colorado Court of Appeals: Securities Company Not Liable for Outside Bad Acts of Its Broker

The Colorado Court of Appeals issued its opinion in Houston v. Southeast Investments, N.C., Inc. on Thursday, May 18, 2017.

InvestmentsColorado Securities ActControl Person Liability.

Sorenson created and owned 1st Consumer Financial Services, Inc. (CFS). Around early 2011 Sorenson hired Hornick to work for CFS. Southeast Investments N.C., Inc. (Southeast) was an authorized and registered broker-dealer of securities at all relevant times. In February 2013 Sorenson signed an independent contractor agreement and registered representative agreement with Southeast that prohibited him from engaging in business activities not involving Southeast without disclosing such activities to Southeast and obtaining written approval. In spring 2013 Houston, a retired, unmarried woman, agreed to Hornick’s requests and liquidated her entire retirement savings and transferred the money into a self-directed IRA account to be managed by Hornick. Ultimately these funds were invested in CFS and Houston was unable to obtain a return of the money. Houston sued a number of parties under various theories of liability, including a control person liability claim against Southeast. The district court concluded that, as a matter of law, Southeast was not a control person with regard to Sorenson’s conduct underlying Houston’s securities fraud claim, and Southeast was entitled to summary judgment.

The sole issue on appeal was whether the district court erred in granting summary judgment for Southeast, based on its conclusion that, as a matter of law, Southeast was not liable as a control person under C.R.S. § 11-51-604(5)(b) of the Colorado Securities Act (the Act). A plaintiff establishes a prima facie case of control person liability where the plaintiff demonstrates that (1) a primary violation of securities fraud occurred and (2) the defendant was a controlling person. As a general rule, a broker-dealer is statutorily in control of its registered representatives as a matter of law. However, a broker-dealer is not in statutory control of its registered representative’s underlying conduct when all of the following factors are undisputed: (1) the plaintiff did not reasonably rely on the registered representative’s relationship with the broker-dealer in making plaintiff’s investment; (2) the plaintiff invested in markets other than those promoted by the broker-dealer; (3) the registered representative did not rely on its relationship with the broker-dealer to access the securities market to sell the subject securities to the plaintiff; and (4) the broker-dealer did not know of, or have a financial interest in, the investor’s business with the registered representative.

Here, Sorenson hid his conduct from Southeast by failing to notify Southeast of his outside securities sales on behalf of CFS and by using undisclosed, private email accounts to engage in the subject transactions. No one from Southeast knew about Sorenson’s involvement with Houston. Sorenson did not use Southeast’s access to the securities markets to promote or conduct his deals with Houston (through Hornick), because CFS was a private venture created and owned by Sorenson. Southeast never held any of Houston’s money because Sorenson never opened a Southeast account for Houston. Southeast accordingly had no financial interest in Houston’s investments with Sorenson. Houston did not rely on Sorenson’s relationship with Southeast in deciding to invest with Sorenson. Thus, Southeast was not in control of Sorenson with respect to his conduct underlying this case, and Southeast was entitled to judgment as a matter of law on the issue of control.

The judgment was affirmed.

Summary provided courtesy of The Colorado Lawyer.

Bills Closing Torrens Title, Allowing Electronic Preservation of Plats by Clerk & Recorder, Adopting Revised Uniform Notorial Acts Law, and More Signed

Although the legislative session is over, the governor continues to sign bills. This week, he signed one bill on Monday, May 15; four bills on Wednesday, May 17; and 13 bills on Thursday, May 18. To date, he has signed 231 bills and vetoed one bill this legislative session. The bills signed this week are summarized here.

Monday, May 15

  • HB 17-1204“Concerning Juvenile Delinquency Record Expungement, and, in Connection Therewith, Making an Appropriation,” by Rep. Pete Lee and Sen. John Cooke. The bill restricts access to juvenile delinquency records by making certain records public only after a court orders that a child be charged as an adult, consistent with recent changes to the direct file statute, and by eliminating the requirement that the prosecuting attorney notify the school principal of minor offenses.

Wednesday, May 17

  • HB 17-1248“Concerning the Funding of Colorado Water Conservation Board Projects, and, in Connection Therewith, Making Appropriations,” by Rep. Jeni Arndt and Sens. John Cooke & Jerry Sonnenberg. The bill makes certain appropriations from the Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB) construction fund to the CWCB or the Division of Water Resources.
  • HB 17-1301“Concerning Protecting Colorado Citizens who are Engaged in an Act that is Protected by the Colorado Constitution from Outside Agencies,” by Rep. Steve Lebsock and Sen. Tim Neville. The bill prohibits a state agency from aiding or assisting a federal agency or agency of another state in arresting a Colorado citizen for committing an act that is a Colorado constitutional right; or violating a Colorado citizen’s Colorado constitutional right.
  • SB 17-129“Concerning the Electronic Preservation of a Plat Recorded by a County Clerk and Recorder,” by Sen. Jerry Sonnenberg and Reps. Jon Becker & Jeni Arndt. The bill permits a county clerk and recorder to preserve an original plat in an electronic format. If an electronic filing system is established, then the board of county commissioners is authorized to provide additional funding and space suitable for a county surveyor or any other appropriate local government official to store original mylar, paper, or polyester sheets of subdivision plats and land survey plats.
  • SB 17-140“Concerning the Torrens Title Registration System,” by Sen. Jerry Sonnenberg and Reps. Jon Becker & Jeni Arndt. The bill closes the Torrens title registration system to new applications to register land title in this state, effective January 1, 2018.

Thursday, May 18

  • HB 17-1162“Concerning Action that can be Taken Against an Individual Based on the Individual’s Failure to Pay for a Traffic Violation, and, in Connection Therewith, Making an Appropriation,” by Rep. Matt Gray and Sen. Bob Gardner. The bill decreases the penalty for driving under restraint to a class A traffic infraction if the basis of the restraint is an outstanding judgment.
  • HB 17-1201“Concerning Authorization for Granting a High School Diploma Endorsement in the Combined Disciplines of Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics,” by Rep. James Coleman and Sens. Kevin Priola & Rachel Zenzinger. The bill authorizes a school district, board of cooperative services, district charter high school, or institute charter high school to grant a high school diploma endorsement in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) to students who demonstrate mastery in STEM. To obtain the endorsement, a student must complete the high school graduation requirements at a high level of proficiency, successfully complete 4 STEM courses selected by the local education provider in addition to the high school graduation requirements in these subjects, achieve a minimum score specified in the bill on one of several specified mathematics assessments, and successfully complete a final capstone project.
  • HB 17-1211“Concerning Professional Development for Educators Regarding Disciplinary Strategies for Young Students,” by Rep. James Coleman and Sen. Kevin Priola. The bill creates the discipline strategies pilot program to provide money to school districts, boards of cooperative services, and charter schools for professional development for educators in the use of culturally responsive methods of student discipline for students enrolled in preschool through third grade and developmentally appropriate responses to the behavioral issues of students enrolled in preschool through third grade.
  • HB 17-1214“Concerning Efforts to Encourage Employee Ownership of the State’s Existing Small Businesses,” by Rep. James Coleman and Sen. Jack Tate. The bill requires the Colorado Office of Economic Development to engage the services of a local nonprofit organization that supports and promotes the employee-owned business model to educate the staff at the office on the forms and merits of employee ownership in order for the office to promote employee ownership as part of its small business assistance center.
  • HB 17-1227“Concerning an Extension of Demand-Side Management Goals for Investor-Owned Utilities as Set by the Public Utilities Commission,” by Reps. Faith Winter & Polly Lawrence and Sens. Stephen Fenberg & Kevin Priola. The bill extends programs establishing electricity goals for investor-owned utilities until 2028.
  • HB 17-1246“Concerning Implementation of the STEMI Task Force Recommendations Relating to Reporting Confirmed Heart Attack Incidents in the State,” by Rep. Tracy Kraft-Tharp and Sens. Leroy Garcia & Jack Tate. The bill implements recommendations of the STEMI task force regarding hospital reporting of heart attacks.
  • HB 17-1266“Concerning Allowing Persons who were Convicted of Misdemeanors for Marijuana-Related Behaviors that are No Longer Illegal to Petition for the Sealing of Criminal Records Relating to Such Convictions,” by Reps. Edie Hooten & Jovan Melton and Sens. Vicki Marble & Stephen Fenberg. The bill allows persons who were convicted of misdemeanors for the use or possession of marijuana to petition for the sealing of criminal records relating to such convictions if their behavior would not have been a criminal offense if the behavior had occurred on or after December 10, 2012.
  • HB 17-1354“Concerning the Collection of Delinquent Taxes on Certain Mobile Homes,” by Rep. KC Becker and Sens. Kevin Priola & John Kefalas. The bill makes the process to enforce the collection of delinquent taxes on mobile or manufactured homes that are not affixed to the ground permissive, and therefore gives the county treasurer more flexibility to enter into partial payment agreements with the owners of such mobile or manufactured homes. The bill authorizes the county treasurer to declare tax liens on mobile or manufactured homes that are not affixed to the ground as county-held to address title deficiencies in conjunction with the collection of taxes.
  • SB 17-132“Concerning Enactment of the ‘Revised Uniform Law on Notarial Acts’ as Amended,” by Sen. Bob Gardner and Reps. Jovan Melton & Cole Wist. The bill enacts the Revised Uniform Law on Notarial Acts, and creates a working group to study and make recommendations by December 1, 2017, regarding electronic remote notarization. The Secretary of State must promulgate rules regarding electronic remote notarization, after which notaries may perform a notarial act by electronic remote notarization in compliance with the rules.
  • SB 17-193“Concerning the Establishment of the ‘Center for Research into Substance Use Disorder Prevention, Treatment, and Recovery Support Strategies’ at the University of Colorado Health Sciences Center, and, in Connection Therewith, Making an Appropriation,” by Sens. Kevin Lundberg & Cheri Jahn and Reps. Bob Rankin & Brittany Pettersen. The bill establishes the Center for Research into Substance Use Disorder Prevention, Treatment, and Recovery Support Strategies at the University of Colorado Health Sciences Center.
  • SB 17-207“Concerning Strengthening Colorado’s Statewide Response to Behavioral Health Crises, and, in Connection Therewith, Making an Appropriation,” by Sens. John Cooke & Daniel Kagan and Reps. Lang Sias & Joseph Salazar. The bill clarifies the intent of the General Assembly for establishing a coordinated behavioral health crisis response system. The crisis system is intended to be a comprehensive, appropriate, and preferred response to behavioral health crises in Colorado. By clarifying the role of the crisis system and making necessary enhancements, the bill puts systems in place to help Colorado end the use of jails and correctional facilities as placement options for individuals placed on emergency mental health holds if they have not also been charged with a crime and enhances the ability of emergency departments to serve individuals who are experiencing a behavioral health crisis.
  • SB 17-297“Concerning Revising Higher Education Performance Requirements,” by Sen. Kent Lambert and Rep. Millie Hamner. The bill repeals a performance-based funding plan for institutions of higher education that was included in the master plan for Colorado postsecondary education. The performance-based funding plan was not implemented.
  • SB 17-305“Concerning Modifications to Select Statutory Provisions Affecting Primary Elections Enacted by Voters at the 2016 Statewide General Election to Facilitate the Effective Implementation of the State’s Election Laws, and, in Connection Therewith, Making an Appropriation,” by Sens. Stephen Fenberg & Kevin Lundberg and Reps. Patrick Neville & Mike Foote. At the 2016 general election, the voters of the state approved 2 initiated measures affecting primary elections: Proposition 107, which restored a presidential primary election, and Proposition 108, which allows participation by unaffiliated voters in primary elections. The bill makes several modifications to some of the statutory provisions that were affected by Propositions 107 and 108 for the purpose of facilitating the effective implementation of the state’s election laws.

For a complete list of the governor’s 2017 legislative actions, click here.

Colorado Supreme Court: Blunt Wraps are “Kind” or “Form” of Tobacco Product Subject to Taxation

The Colorado Supreme Court issued its opinion in Colorado Department of Revenue v. Creager Mercantile Co. on Monday, May 15, 2017.

Statutory Construction—Tobacco taxation.

The supreme court granted certiorari review to determine whether Blunt Wraps, a type of cigar wrapper made in part of tobacco and designed to be filled with smoking material and smoked, may be taxed as “tobacco products,” as that term is defined in C.R.S. § 39-28.5-101(5). The court held that because Blunt Wraps are a “kind” or “form” of tobacco and are “prepared in such manner as to be suitable . . . for smoking,” they fall within the plain language of the statutory definition of “tobacco products” and are taxable accordingly. The court therefore reversed the judgment of the court of appeals.

Summary provided courtesy of The Colorado Lawyer.

Colorado Court of Appeals: Double Recovery Not Considered in Forum Non Conveniens Determination

The Colorado Court of Appeals issued its opinion in Cox v. Sage Hospitality Resources, LLC on Thursday, May 4, 2017.

Forum Non Conveniens—Judicial Inefficiency—Double Recovery.

Cox, a Colorado resident, stayed at a hotel in California owned by defendant Sage Hospitality Resources, LLC. Sage’s members are Colorado residents, and its principal place of business is in Denver. WS HDM, LLC, incorporated in Delaware and licensed to do business in California, owns and operates the hotel. Cox fell on the hotel property and fractured his femur. Cox sued Sage in Denver District Court and WS HDM in California state court. Sage’s motion to dismiss the action in Denver District Court under the doctrine of forum non conveniens was granted.

On appeal, Cox argued that the Denver District Court erred in granting Sage’s motion to dismiss because there were no unusual circumstances sufficient to overcome the strong presumption in favor of Colorado courts hearing cases brought by Colorado residents. Colorado law is clear that the doctrine of forum non conveniens has “only the most limited application in Colorado courts.” Thus, unless there are “most unusual circumstances,” a Colorado resident’s choice of a Colorado forum will not be disturbed. Cox is a Colorado resident and claims to prefer to sue Sage in Colorado. Even though Cox filed a related suit in California state court, the existence of that lawsuit does not trump Cox’s choice of forum in Colorado. Further, the California state court suit is against a different defendant, and the record does not indicate that the joinder of Sage in Cox’s California state court suit is mandatory. Nor does the risk of double recovery overcome the presumption in favor of Colorado courts hearing suits filed by Colorado resident plaintiffs. The Denver District Court erred in dismissing Cox’s action.

The judgment was reversed and the case was remanded.

Summary provided courtesy of The Colorado Lawyer.

Graywater Exemption Bill and Hospital Reimbursement Bill Signed Monday

On Monday, May 8, 2017, the governor signed two bills into law. To date, he has signed 213 bills and vetoed one bill this legislative session. The bills signed Monday are summarized here.

  • HB 17-1008“Concerning an Exemption from the Water Quality Control Commission’s Graywater Control Regulations for Graywater Used for the Purpose of Scientific Research Involving Human Exposure,” by Rep. Jeni Arndt and Sen. Jerry Sonnenberg. The bill creates an exemption from the commission’s graywater control regulations for scientific research whereby a water utility, an institution of higher education in Colorado, or a public or private entity that a water utility or an institution of higher education in Colorado contracts with to conduct graywater research may collect, treat, and use graywater for purposes of scientific research under certain circumstances.
  • SB 17-256“Concerning Hospital Reimbursement Rates for the 2017-18 State Fiscal Year,” by Sen.  Kent Lambert and Rep. Millie Hamner. For the 2017-18 state fiscal year, if the amount of revenue collected from the hospital provider fee is insufficient to fully fund all of the statutory purposes for the fee, the bill requires any reduction to be taken from hospital reimbursements.

For a list of all of the governor’s 2017 legislative actions, click here.