Colorado: Court citation practice | Citation Rule(s)


Examples from Colo. Oil & Gas Conservation Comm'n v. Grand Valley Citizens' Alliance, 2012 CO 52, 279 P.3d 646

¶1 Grand Valley Citizens' Alliance, along with Cary Weldon, Ruth Weldon, Wesley Kent, Marcia Kent, and Western Colorado Congress (collectively, ("GVC") filled a complaint against the Colorado Oil and Gas Conversation Commission and others (the "Commission") alleging that it was entitled to a hearing on an application for permit to drill ("APD") pursuant to section 34-60-108(7), C.R.S. (2011), of the Oil and Gas Conservation Act (the "Act") and section 24-4-105, C.R.S. (2011), of the Colorado Administrative Procedure Act. The trial court dismissed the complaint opf the ground that GVC had no standing to request a hearing.

¶2 GVC appealed and the court of appeals reversed. . . .

. . . .

¶15 Here, the Commission promulgated a rule stating that any person seeking to drill must file an APD. 2 Colo. Code Regs. § 404-1:303.a (as amended 2009). However, only the operator, surface owner, or the relevant local government may request a hearing on an APD under the Commission’s rule. 2 Colo. Code Regs. § 404-1:503.b.7 (as amended 2009). GVC cannot seek a hearing under the Commission’s rule because it is not the operator, surface owner, or relevant local government.

¶16 This is not to say, however, that GVC cannot participate in the process and voice its concerns. Under Rule 303.m.(1), the director "may withhold approval of any [APD] … based on information supplied in a written complaint submitted by any party with standing under Rule 522.a.(1)." 2 Colo. Code Regs. § 404-1 (2009). Rule 522.a.(1) states, in part, that a complaint can be filed by "any other person who may be directly and adversely affected or aggrieved as the result of [an] alleged violation." 2 Colo. Code Regs. § 404-1 (2009). Under these rules, GVC’s request to intervene was properly treated as a complaint.

¶17 In this case, the legislature granted the Commission broad authority under section 34-60-106(1)(f) to regulate the permitting process. Here, the Commission has determined, pursuant to its rules, that only a limited number of parties, not including GVC may request a hearing on an APD. We see no grounds for disturbing that determination. See Colorado Ground Water Comm’n v. Eagle Peak Farms, 919 P.2d 212, 217 (Colo. 1996) (agency rules are "presumed valid" and any challenging party has "a heavy burden" to establish that the agency violated constitutional or statutory law, exceeded its authority, or lacked a basis in the record).

. . . .

C.J. Directive 12-01, http://www.courts.state.co.us/Courts/Supreme_Court/Directives/CJD%2012-01.pdf.

PUBLIC DOMAIN CITATION FORMAT FOR COLORADO SUPREME COURT AND COLORADO COURT OF APPEALS CASES

Given the increasing amount of legal research being conducted via the internet and other electronic resources and the desire to promote equal access to Colorado's system of justice, this Chief Justice Directive establishes a public domain citation format that will support the use of Colorado case law in both book and electronic formats.

Legal practitioners and self-represented parties will be permitted-but not required-to use the public domain citation format instead of citing to the Pacific Reporter. Irrespective of which citation format is used, a parallel citation to the other format is also not required.

Beginning January 1, 2012, the Clerk of the Colorado Supreme Court and the Clerk of the Colorado Court of Appeals shall assign to all opinions announced for publication a citation that shall include:

  1. The calendar year in which the opinion is announced;
  2. Followed by the court designator "CO" for published opinions announced by the Colorado Supreme Court, or followed by the court designator "COA" for published opinions announced by the Court of Appeals; and
  3. Followed by a consecutive Arabic numeral, beginning in each new calendar year with the number "1"; for example: "2012 CO 1" for the first published opinion announced by the Colorado Supreme Court in 2012, and "2012 COA 1" for the first published opinion announced by the Colorado Court of Appeals in 2012.

This public domain citation shall appear on the title page of each published opinion announced by the Supreme Court and by the Court of Appeals. All publishers of Colorado Supreme Court and Colorado Court of Appeals materials are requested to include this public domain citation within the heading of each Colorado opinion they publish on or after January 1, 2012. In addition:

Numbered paragraphs. Beginning with the first paragraph of text, each paragraph in every published opinion shall be numbered consecutively beginning with a "¶" symbol followed by an Arabic numeral-beginning with the number "1"-flush with the left margin, opposite the first word of the paragraph. Paragraph numbers shall continue consecutively throughout the text of the majority opinion and on through any concurrence or dissent. Footnotes and paragraphs within footnotes shall not be numbered, nor shall markers, captions, headings, or numerated titles that merely divide sections of opinions. Block-indented, single-spaced portions of a paragraph shall not be numbered as a separate paragraph. All publishers of Colorado Supreme Court and Colorado Court of Appeals materials are requested to include these paragraph numbers in each opinion they publish.

Unpublished opinions. Opinions that are not designated for official publication pursuant to C.A.R. 35(f) shall not be assigned a public domain citation.

Modification, revision, or other substantive amendment. In the case of opinions that are modified, revised, or otherwise substantively amended by subsequent order of the Supreme Court or of the Court of Appeals, the public domain citation of the modified, revised, or amended opinion shall be the same as the original public domain citation but followed by the letter "M"; for example, "2012 CO 1M" in the case of a modified Colorado Supreme Court opinion, and "2012 COA 1M" in the case of a modified Colorado Court of Appeals opinion. In the event an opinion is modified, revised, or otherwise substantively amended more than once, the public domain citation of any additional modified, revised, or amended opinion shall be the same as the original public domain citation but designated with the letter "M" followed by a hyphen and the appropriate Arabic numeral; for example: "2012 CO 1M-2" in the case of a Colorado Supreme Court opinion modified a second time, and "2012 CO 1M-3" in the case of a Colorado Supreme Court opinion modified a third time, and so on.

Withdrawn, vacated, and reissued opinions. In the case of opinions that are withdrawn or vacated by a subsequent order of the Supreme Court or of the Court of Appeals, the public domain citation of the withdrawing or vacating order shall be the same as the original public domain citation but followed by the letter "W"; for example, "2012 CO 1W" in the case of a withdrawn or vacated Colorado Supreme Court opinion, and "2012 COA 1W" in the case of a withdrawn or vacated Colorado Court of Appeals opinion. In addition, the withdrawn or vacated opinion shall be removed from the electronic database of opinions maintained by the Supreme Court, and all publishers of Colorado Supreme Court and Colorado Court of Appeals materials are requested to remove withdrawn or vacated opinions from their electronic databases. An opinion that is reissued in place of a withdrawn or vacated opinion shall be assigned the next consecutive number appropriate to the date on which the reissued opinion is announced.

Examples of proper public domain citation format. The public domain citation format applies to published opinions announced by the Colorado Supreme Court and the Colorado Court of Appeals on or after January 1, 2012. The following examples are not real cases and are used for illustrative purposes only:

Colorado Supreme Court:

Primary citation:
Smith v. Jones, 2012 CO 22.

Primary citation with pinpoint citation:
Smith v. Jones, 2012 CO 22, ¶¶13-14.

Subsequent citation with pinpoint citation:
Smith, ¶¶13-14.

Id. citation with pinpoint citation:
Id. at ¶¶13-14.

Colorado Court of Appeals:

Primary citation:
Jones v. Smith, 2012 COA 35.

Primary citation with pinpoint citation:
Jones v. Smith, 2012 COA 35, ¶¶44-45.

Subsequent citation with pinpoint citation:
Jones, ¶¶44-45.

Id. citation with pinpoint citation:
Id. at ¶¶44-45.