August 21, 2019

HB 17-1159: Adding Remedies in Forcible Entry and Detainer Actions

On February 6, 2017, Rep. Jon Becker and Sen. John Cooke introduced HB 17-1159, “Concerning Actions Related to Forcible Entry and Detainer.”

The bill adds to the current descriptions of forcible detainer the act of a person preventing an owner from access to or possession of property by locking or changing the lock on the property.

The bill creates a procedure for the plaintiff to seek a temporary, mandatory injunction giving the plaintiff possession of the property if a complaint for forcible entry or detainer is filed. The procedure requires the plaintiff to store any personal property found on the property but allows the plaintiff to recover the costs of the storage.

The bill establishes as new crimes related to forcible entry and detainer the crimes of unlawful occupancy and unlawful reentry.

The bill was introduced into the House and assigned to the Judiciary and Appropriations committees.

Two JDF Forms Amended in March

The Colorado State Judicial Branch has amended two JDF forms this month: JDF 604, “Notice and Order to File JDF 601 District Court Case Cover Sheet,” and Form 32, “Writ of Garnishment – Judgment Debtor Other Than Natural Person.” Additionally, one JDF form was amended in February: JDF 100, “Instructions for Forcible Entry and Detainer (FED)/Evictions.” The JDF forms are generally available as PDFs and Word documents on the State Judicial forms page. For all of State Judicial’s JDF forms, click here.

Protective Order, Parenting Time JDFs Modified in December

The Colorado State Judicial Branch has amended six forms in December 2015, including forms regarding protective orders, instructions for forcible entry and detainer, and motions to modify parenting time and decision-making responsibility. The forms are available here in PDF format and are available in Word or PDF on the State Judicial forms page.


  • JDF 1406 – Verified Motion to Modify/Restrict Parenting Time (revised 12/15)
  • JDF 1415 – Verified Motion/Stipulation to Modify Decision-Making Responsibility (revised 12/15)


  • JDF 100 – Instructions for Forcible Entry and Detainer (FED)/Eviction (revised 12/15)


  • JDF 400 – Instructions for Obtaining a Civil Protection Order (revised 12/15)
  • JDF 401 – Incident Checklist (revised 12/15)
  • JDF 442 – Information Sheet for Registering a Protection Order (revised 12/15)

Colorado Court of Appeals: Actual and Potential Rental Income Properly Used as Measure of Restitution

The Colorado Court of Appeals issued its opinion in Zeke Coffee, Inc. v. Pappas-Alstad Partnership on Thursday, July 30, 2015.

Commercial Lease—Eviction—Erroneous Judgment—Restitution—Discount Rate.

In March 2004, plaintiffs (collectively, Zeke) entered into afive-year lease agreement with Pappas-Alstad Partnership to operate a coffee shop. In September 2008, Zeke notified Pappas-Alstad of its intent to exercise an option to extend the lease for an additional five years. Pappas-Alstad said Zeke had breached a term of the lease and, after Zeke refused to cure the alleged breach, it notified Zeke that the lease had been terminated and converted into a month-to-month tenancy. In June 2009, Pappas-Alstad served a three-day demand for compliance or possession on Zeke. Zeke filed an action in district court seeking a declaratory judgment that the lease remained in effect and that Pappas-Alstad had breached it. Pappas-Alstad served Zeke a notice to quit and included in its amended answer a counterclaim seeking Zeke’s eviction. The district court issued a writ of eviction restoring possession of the property to Pappas-Alstad. A division of this Court of Appeals reversed, finding that Zeke had properly exercised the option to extend the lease and had been wrongfully evicted. In a written order, the district court determined that restitution was the appropriate remedy. Pappas-Alstad was required to restore everything it gained through the erroneous judgment.

On appeal, Pappas-Alstad contended that the district court erred in using its actual and potential rental income from the premises as a measure of the appropriate restitution. Zeke would have had to pay rent to Pappas-Alstad had the erroneous judgment never been entered. However, Zeke also would have been able to maintain its coffee business and the business income opportunities associated with it. Therefore, the district court did not abuse its discretion in not reducing Pappas-Alstad’s rental income by the rent it would have otherwise received from Zeke. The court also was not required to reduce from the award Pappas-Alstad’s expenses or losses in re-leasing the property.

Pappas-Alstad argued that the court erred in selecting the Treasury Bill rate as the discount rate to determine the present value of its future cash flow. The district court determined that the value of all future rent proceeds through the end of Zeke’s lease (from 2014 to 2019) should be calculated using a discount rate. The Treasury Bill rate has been recognized as a valid method for discounting future cash flows to present value. Therefore, the court’s decision to use the Treasury Bill rate was not an abuse of discretion. The order was affirmed and thecase was remanded to district court to award Zeke a reasonable amount of attorney fees incurred on appeal.

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

JDF Forms Amended in Several Categories in November and December

The Colorado State Judicial Branch revised several forms and instructions in November and December 2014. Many categories were affected, including toll ticket appeals, juvenile delinquency, domestic relations, probate, forcible entry and detainer, and sealing cases. Amended forms are available here in PDF format, and are available for download as Word documents on State Judicial’s forms page.


  • JDF 234 – “Notice of Appeal and Designation of Record – E-470 Case” (revised 11/14)
  • JDF 235 – “Notice of Record Certified to County Court – E-470 Case” (revised 11/14)


  • JDF 219 – “Juvenile Delinquency Application for Public Defender” (revised 11/14)


  • JDF 1101 – “Petition for: Dissolution of Marriage/Legal Separation” (revised 12/14)
  • JDF 1201 – “Affidavit for Decree Without Appearance of the Parties (Marriage)” (revised 12/14)
  • JDF 1601 – “Petition for Declaration of Invalidity of Marriage” (revised 12/14)


  • JDF 100 – “Instructions for Forcible Entry and Detainer (FED)/Eviction” (revised 11/14)
  • JDF 140 – “Instructions for Mobile Home FED” (revised 11/14)


  • JDF 450 – “Order re: Appointment of Counsel at State Expense Other Than the Public Defender in a Criminal or Juvenile Delinquency Proceeding” (revised 11/14)


  • JDF 730 – “Decree of Final Discharge” (revised 12/14)
  • JDF 810 – “Court Visitor’s Report” (revised 12/14)
  • JDF 824 – “Petition for Appointment of Guardian for Minor” (revised 12/14)
  • JDF 834 – “Guardian’s Report – Minor” (revised 12/14)
  • JDF 841 – “Petition for Appointment of Guardian for Adult” (revised 12/14)
  • JDF 850 – “Guardian’s Report – Adult” (revised 12/14)
  • JDF 861 – “Petition for Appointment of Conservator for Minor” (revised 12/14)
  • JDF 876 – “Petition for Appointment of Conservator for Adult” (revised 12/14)
  • JDF 878 – “Order Appointing Conservator for Adult” (revised 12/14)
  • JDF 885 – “Conservator’s Report” (revised 12/14)


  • JDF 301 – “Instructions to File an Expungement Juvenile “JV” Case, Criminal “CR” Case, or Municipal Case” (revised 12/14)

For all of State Judicial’s JDF forms, click here.

Revised JDF Forms Available in Family, Adoption, Miscellaneous, and Other Categories

The Colorado State Judicial Branch continues to revise JDF forms. Several forms have been revised in December 2013 and January 2014. These include forms from the adoption, domestic, miscellaneous, money demand, name change, and other categories.

Forms are available here in PDF format. Most forms are also available for download as Microsoft Word documents from the State Judicial website.


  • JDF 515 – “Motion to Waive Family Assessment/Home Study” (R12/13)
  • JDF 520 – “Petition to Terminate the Parent-Child Legal Relationship” (R12/13)


  • JDF 211 – “Motion to Reduce Payment for ODR Services and Supporting Financial Affidavit” (R12/13)
  • JDF 1115 – “Separation Agreement (Marriage)” (R1/14)
  • JDF 1201 – “Affidavit for Decree Without Appearance of Parties (Marriage)” (R1/14)
  • JDF 1215 – “Evaluation of a Foreign Decree” (R1/14)
  • JDF 1256 – “Separation Agreement (Civil Union)” (R1/14)
  • JDF 1258 – “Affidavit for Decree Without Appearance of Parties (Civil Union)” (R1/14)
  • JDF 1820M – “Worksheet A – Child Support Obligation: Sole Physical Care” (R1/14)
  • JDF 1821M – “Worksheet A – Child Support Obligation: Shared Physical Care” (R1/14)
  • JDF 1822 – “Instructions for Completing Child Support Worksheets” (R1/14)


  • JDF 91 – “Motion for Entry of Judgment on Stipulation” (R12/13)


  • JDF 82 – “Instructions for Collecting a Judgment and Completing a Writ of Garnishment” (R12/13)


  • JDF 35 – “Application for Administrative Relief from Federal Firearms Prohibitions” (12/13)
  • JDF 36 – “Petition for Relief Pursuant to § 13-5-142.5 or § 13-9-124 from Federal Firearms Prohibitions” (12/13)
  • JDF 37 – “Order for Relief from Federal Firearms Prohibitions” (12/13)


  • JDF 91 – “Motion for Entry of Judgment on Stipulation” (R12/13)
  • JDF 601 – “District Court Civil Cover Sheet” (R12/13)
  • JDF 603 – “Instructions to Complete District Court Civil Cover Sheet” (R12/13)


  • JDF 420 – “Instructions for Filing for a Change of Name – Minor” (R12/13)
  • JDF 432 – “Instructions for Filing a Change of Name – Adult” (R12/13)


  • JDF 417 – “Petition to Seal Arrest and Criminal Records Other Than Convictions” (R12/13)

For all of State Judicial’s JDF forms, click here.

Colorado Court of Appeals: Hotel Owes Intoxicated Guest Duty of Care; Summary Judgment Reversed

The Colorado Court of Appeals issued its opinion in Groh v. Westin Operators, LLC on Thursday, March 28, 2013.

Negligence—Hotel Contract—Duty of Care—Reasonableness—Breach—Proximate Cause.

Plaintiff Jillian Groh appealed the summary judgment entered in favor of defendant Westin Operator, LLC (Westin). The judgment was reversed in part and the case was remanded for further proceedings.

The Westin asked Groh and her guests to leave the hotel after Groh and her friends, who were intoxicated, became loud in the hotel. After Westin employees escorted Groh and her friends out of the front entrance to the hotel, one of Groh’s friends, who was also intoxicated, attempted to drive them home and rear-ended a vehicle that was traveling well below the speed limit. Groh sustained severe and permanent injuries.

On appeal, Groh argued that the Westin did not act reasonably in evicting Groh and her friends from the hotel, and that the trial court abused its discretion in granting summary judgment to Westin on her negligence claim. A hotel must evict a guest in a reasonable manner, which precludes ejecting a guest into foreseeably dangerous circumstances resulting from either the guest’s condition or the environment.

Here, a jury could find that the Westin set in motion the chain of events that led to Groh’s injury by entering her room without permission; deciding to evict her notwithstanding the absence of any complaints from other guests; and then—despite knowing that she was intoxicated and was accompanied by others who were as well—escorting her from the premises rather than allowing her to wait for a taxi in the lobby, a public area. Therefore, although the Westin properly terminated its contract with Groh and then could evict her, the disputed facts and favorable inferences in the record preclude finding, as a matter of law, that it did so in a reasonable manner. Because a reasonable jury could find a breach of this duty on the present record, the trial court erred in granting summary judgment to Westin on Groh’s negligence claim.

Summary and full case available here.