Colo. Rev. Stat. » Title 13
Colorado Revised Statutes

Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-22-217 (2024)

Witnesses - subpoenas - depositions - discovery

✓ C.R.S. 2024: the 2025 and 2026 sessions are not included
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CO-LEGleg.colorado.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(1) An arbitrator may issue a subpoena for the attendance of a witness and for the production of records and other evidence at any hearing and may administer oaths. A subpoena issued under this section shall be served in the manner for service of subpoenas in a civil action and, upon motion to the court by a party to the arbitration proceeding or by the arbitrator, enforced in the manner for enforcement of subpoenas in a civil action.

(2) In order to make the proceedings fair, expeditious, and cost effective, upon the request of a party or a witness in an arbitration proceeding, an arbitrator may permit a deposition of any witness to be taken for use as evidence at the hearing, including a witness who cannot be subpoenaed for a hearing or who is unable to attend a hearing. The arbitrator shall determine the conditions under which the deposition is taken.

(3) An arbitrator may permit such discovery as the arbitrator decides is appropriate in the circumstances, taking into account the needs of the parties to the arbitration proceeding and other affected persons and the desirability of making the proceeding fair, expeditious, and cost effective.

(4) If an arbitrator permits discovery under subsection (3) of this section, the arbitrator may order a party to the arbitration proceeding to comply with the arbitrator's discovery-related orders, issue subpoenas for the attendance of a witness and for the production of records and other evidence at a discovery proceeding, and take action against a non-complying party to the extent a court could take such action if the controversy were the subject of a civil action; except that the arbitrator shall not have the power of contempt.

(5) An arbitrator may issue a protective order to prevent the disclosure of privileged information, confidential information, trade secrets, and other information protected from disclosure to the extent a court could if the controversy were the subject of a civil action.

(6) All provisions of law that compel a person under subpoena to testify and all fees for attending a judicial proceeding, a deposition, or a discovery proceeding as a witness shall apply to an arbitration proceeding in the same manner as if the controversy were the subject of a civil action.

(7) The court may enforce a subpoena or discovery-related order for the attendance of a witness within this state and for the production of records and other evidence issued by an arbitrator in connection with an arbitration proceeding in another state upon conditions determined by the court so as to make the arbitration proceeding fair, expeditious, and cost effective. A subpoena or discovery-related order issued by an arbitrator in another state shall be served in the manner provided by law for service of subpoenas in a civil action and, upon motion to the court by a party to the arbitration proceeding or the arbitrator, enforced in the manner provided by law for enforcement of subpoenas in a civil action. Source: L. 2004: Entire part R&RE, p. 1725, § 1, effective August 4.

Editor's note: This section is similar to former § 13-22-209 as it existed prior to 2004.

Cross references: For the Colorado rule of civil procedure concerning subpoenas, see rule 45; for the fees of witnesses, see § 13-33-102.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1996–2022 · leading case: Tulips Investments, LLC v. State of Colorado ex rel.Suthers, 2015 CO 1, 340 P.3d 1126.
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Tulips Investments, LLC v. State of Colorado ex rel.Suthers, 2015 CO 1, 340 P.3d 1126. · cites it 4× “45 applied, we noted the Revised Uniform Arbitration Act states that subpoenas must not only "be served in the manner for service of subpoenas in a civil action," but also "enforced in the manner for enforcement of subpoenas in a civil action.”
Colorado Mills, LLC v. Sunopta Grains & Foods Inc., 2012 CO 4, 269 P.3d 731. · cites it 7× “§ 18-22-217(4); see also § 13-22-217(1). The question here is whether a Colorado court may enforce such a subpoena against a nonparty who is out-of-state.”
Auto-Owners Ins. v. Summit Park Townhome Ass'n, 129 F. Supp. 3d 1150 (D. Colo. 2015). · cites it 3× “” Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-22-217 (1). Further, an arbitrator “may permit such discovery as the arbitrator decides is appropriate in the circumstances.”
Huizar v. Allstate Ins. Co., 32 P.3d 540 (Colo. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 2× “Huizar fully complied with the terms of the policy requiring arbitration, received an award, and duly filed to docket her arbitration award pursuant to § 13-22-217, C.R.S., 2000. Allstate then responded by invoking the trial de novo clause, which in effect contested its…”
Ringwelski v. Pederson, 919 P.2d 957 (Colo. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 2× “The order denying defendants’ motion to dismiss is reversed, and the cause is remanded with directions to dismiss plaintiffs’ complaint and to enter an order confirming the arbitration award pursuant to § 13-22-213 and § 13-22-217, C.R.S. (1987 Repl.Vol. 6A). CASEBOLT and ROY,…”
Robert J. Herrera v. Santangelo Law Offices, P.C., 520 P.3d 698 (Colo. Ct. App. 2022). · cites it 5× “, § 13-22-217, C.R.S. 2021. But the legislature has also specifically limited the bounds of these powers.”
Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-22-217(1): 3 cases
Tulips Investments, LLC v. State of Colorado ex rel.Suthers, 2015 CO 1, 340 P.3d 1126. “45 applied, we noted the Revised Uniform Arbitration Act states that subpoenas must not only "be served in the manner for service of subpoenas in a civil action," but also "enforced in the manner for enforcement of subpoenas in a civil action.”
Colorado Mills, LLC v. Sunopta Grains & Foods Inc., 2012 CO 4, 269 P.3d 731. “§ 18-22-217(4); see also § 13-22-217(1). The question here is whether a Colorado court may enforce such a subpoena against a nonparty who is out-of-state.”
Robert J. Herrera v. Santangelo Law Offices, P.C., 520 P.3d 698 (Colo. Ct. App. 2022). “, § 13-22-217, C.R.S. 2021. But the legislature has also specifically limited the bounds of these powers.”
Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-22-217(3): 1 case
Auto-Owners Ins. v. Summit Park Townhome Ass'n, 129 F. Supp. 3d 1150 (D. Colo. 2015). “” Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-22-217 (1). Further, an arbitrator “may permit such discovery as the arbitrator decides is appropriate in the circumstances.”
Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-22-217(4): 1 case
Robert J. Herrera v. Santangelo Law Offices, P.C., 520 P.3d 698 (Colo. Ct. App. 2022). “, § 13-22-217, C.R.S. 2021. But the legislature has also specifically limited the bounds of these powers.”
Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-22-217(7): 2 cases
Colorado Mills, LLC v. Sunopta Grains & Foods Inc., 2012 CO 4, 269 P.3d 731. “§ 18-22-217(4); see also § 13-22-217(1). The question here is whether a Colorado court may enforce such a subpoena against a nonparty who is out-of-state.”
Robert J. Herrera v. Santangelo Law Offices, P.C., 520 P.3d 698 (Colo. Ct. App. 2022). “, § 13-22-217, C.R.S. 2021. But the legislature has also specifically limited the bounds of these powers.”
Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-22-217(8): 1 case
Colorado Mills, LLC v. Sunopta Grains & Foods Inc., 2012 CO 4, 269 P.3d 731. “§ 18-22-217(4); see also § 13-22-217(1). The question here is whether a Colorado court may enforce such a subpoena against a nonparty who is out-of-state.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.