July 2, 2015

Colorado Court of Appeals: Complaint Timely Filed in ICCES Despite Selection of Wrong District Court

The Colorado Court of Appeals issued its opinion in Maslak v. Town of Vail on Thursday, January 15, 2015.

CRCP 106(a)(4)—Complaint—E-filing—Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction.

The Town of Vail (Town) and the Vail Recreation District (VRD) submitted an application to the Planning Commission to amend the Vail Golf Course’s conditional use permit so the golf course could be expanded to accommodate an events center. Over the objections of plaintiffs (collectively, homeowners), the Planning Commission approved the application. The homeowners appealed the Planning Commission’s decision to the Town Council, which upheld the decision. The homeowners then filed a CRCP 106(a)(4) complaint, seeking review of the Town Council’s decision. Although the complaint was timely filed, it was inadvertently e-filed in Denver District Court, the wrong district court. The complaint was thereafter e-filed in the Eagle County District Court, the correct district court, but by then it was not timely. The court granted defendants’ motions to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and awarded defendants their attorney fees.

On appeal, the homeowners contended that, because their complaint was timely filed (albeit in the wrong court), the Eagle County District Court erred in dismissing it for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The Court of Appeals agreed. The fact that the homeowners e-filed their complaint with the Denver District Court did not deprive the Eagle County District Court of its subject matter jurisdiction over the action. Furthermore, submitting the complaint to the “correct court” pursuant to the Denver District Court Clerk’s e-filing rejection notice instructions, did not constitute the filing of an entirely new and separate action for purposes of invoking district court jurisdiction within the twenty-eight-day jurisdictional window. The orders were vacated and the case was remanded with directions.

Summary and full case available here, courtesy of The Colorado Lawyer.

CJD 08-02, Regarding Cost Recovery Fees, Amended by Chief Justice Bender

On October 29, 2013, Chief Justice Bender signed changes to Chief Justice Directive 08-02, “Directive Concerning Assessment of Cost Recovery Fees for Maintaining the Technical Infrastructure Necessary to Support Electronic Access to Court Records.”

The changes to the Chief Justice Directive are intended to let parties know about a new feature in ICCES that allows parties to receive notifications. The Directive also updates some of the other cost recovery policies.

For the full Chief Justice Directive, click here. For all of the Chief Justice Directives, click here.

Colorado State Judicial Branch Partners with File & Serve Xpress for Rollout of ICCES Filing System

The Colorado State Judicial Branch announced on Thursday, December 13, 2012, that it would partner with File & Serve Xpress, formerly known as LexisNexis File & Serve, in order to ensure a smooth transition to its new ICCES filing system.

The implementation of the ICCES filing system will be effective in all judicial districts in Colorado by June 3, 2013. It is set to begin in the Second Judicial District on January 7, 2013, and there is a staggered implementation schedule for the counties. It is fully operational, and is currently being used in the Fourteenth, Seventeenth, and Twentieth Judicial Districts.

File & ServeXpress will provide e-filing services to the judicial districts until ICCES is brought online. Pricing for e-filing with File & ServeXpress will remain the same as it was under LexisNexis and to e-file with ICCES.

For more information on ICCES, click here, and for the staggered schedule of implementation for ICCES, click here.