Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
6 Colorado opinions name it 2 courts 1992–2025 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Colorado courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
In Re CLSgreen2 sentences2025See C.L.S., 252 P.3d at 559 (stating that a judgment entered in violation of due process is void). 10 ¶ 26 Because we vacate the judgment and remand the case, we do not address father’s contention that the court abused its discretion by allocating sole parenting time and decision-making responsibility to grandmother. 2014In re C.L.S., 252 P.3d 556 , 559 (Colo.App.2011). | 1 | 3 |
Adoption of Rorygreen2 sentences2014See, e.g., In re Adoption of Rory, 80 Mass.App.Ct. 454 , 954 N.E.2d 22 , 26 (2011). ¶ 25 Although motions seeking relief from a judgment are generally left to the discretion of the trial court, because a judgment entered in violation of due process is either void or not, the trial court has no discretion in making this determination. 2014See, e.g., In re Adoption of Rory, 80 Mass.App.Ct. 454 , 954 N.E.2d 22 , 26 (2011). ¶ 25 Although motions seeking relief from a judgment are generally left to the discretion of the trial court, because a judgment entered in violation of due process is either void or not, the trial court has no discretion in making this determination. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Colorado. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Krumme v. Krumme
green
2 sentences1997Krumme v. Krumme, 6 Kan. 1997Krumme v. Krumme, 6 Kan.App.2d 939 , 636 P.2d 814 (1981). | 2 | 1997–1997 |
La Mar v. La Mar
green
2 sentences1997La Mar v. La Mar, 19 Ariz. App. 128 , 505 P.2d 566 (1973). [20] Further, a judgment entered in violation of the Act is merely voidable, and not void. 1997La Mar v. La Mar, 19 Ariz. App. 128 , 505 P.2d 566 (1973). [20] Further, a judgment entered in violation of the Act is merely voidable, and not void. | 1 | 1997–1997 |
Armentrout v. FMC Corporation
neutral
2 sentences1992Armentrout v. FMC Corp., 819 P.2d 522 (Colo.App.1991). 1992Armentrout v. FMC Corp., 819 P.2d 522 (Colo.App.1991). | 1 | 1992–1992 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.