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

Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-81-101 (2026)

Definitions

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CO-LEGleg.colorado.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

As used in this article, unless the context otherwise requires:

(1) "Applicable statute of limitations" means any statute of limitations which would apply in a similar case to a person not a person under disability.

(2) "Legal representative" means a guardian, conservator, personal representative, executor, or administrator duly appointed by a court having jurisdiction of any person under disability or his estate.

(3) "Person under disability" means any person who is a minor under eighteen years of age, a mental incompetent, or a person under other legal disability and who does not have a legal guardian.

(4) "Take action" means the bringing, commencement, maintenance, or prosecution of any action, suit, or proceeding to enforce any right, or the assertion of any such right in any other manner, affirmatively or by way of defense. "Take action" shall also include exercising the right to elect to receive a lump-sum payment on behalf of the plaintiff in a civil action for purposes of section 13-64-205 (1)(f) when the legal representative determines that the election is in the best interest of the plaintiff.

Source: L. 39: p. 449, § 1. CSA: C. 102, § 28. CRS 53: § 87-3-1. C.R.S. 1963: § 87-2- 1. L. 76: (3) amended, p. 528, § 3, effective May 27. L. 77: (3) amended, p. 818, § 3, effective July 1. L. 86: (2) and (3) amended, p. 701, § 3, effective July 1. L. 2007: (4) amended, p. 172, § 3, effective August 3.

Cross references: (1) For use of the term "mentally or mental incompetent", see § 27- 10.5-135.

(2) For the legislative declaration contained in the 2007 act amending subsection (4), see section 1 of chapter 49, Session Laws of Colorado 2007.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 29 cases (7 in the last 5 years), 1975–2026 · leading case: Broyles v. Fort Lyon Canal Co., 695 P.2d 1136 (Colo. 1985).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Broyles v. Fort Lyon Canal Co., 695 P.2d 1136 (Colo. 1985). · cites it 5× “We need not decide here whether the specific tolling provision in section 37-92-601 concerning conditions beyond the control of the applicant should also apply to applicants who file untimely requests for findings of reasonable diligence pursuant to the otherwise identical…”
Elgin v. Bartlett, 994 P.2d 411 (Colo. 1999). · cites it 7× “2 The two-year statute of limitations applicable to negligence of a health care professional is tolled with regard to “a person otherwise under disability as defined in section 13-81-101, in which case the action may be maintained within the time period as provided in section…”
Hane by & Through Jabalera v. Tubman, 899 P.2d 332 (Colo. Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 7× “5(3)(d)(II) and § 13-81-101, C.R.S. (1987 Repl.Vol. 6A), those provisions may be construed as requiring any minor who does not have a legal guardian at the time the alleged act of negligence occurs to have until age 18 to assert the claim or until two years after a legal…”
Tenney v. Flaxer, 727 P.2d 1079 (Colo. 1986). · cites it 11× “greed, concluding that if plaintiff Southard were found on remand to be under a disability sufficient to invoke the general tolling provisions of section 13-81-103(1)(a), his claim would not be barred, since that provision also applied to the limitations period for medical…”
Adams Cnty. Sch. Dist. No. 1 v. Dist. Court, 611 P.2d 963 (Colo. 1980). · cites it 10× “Section 5 of the 1977 amendment to section 13-81-101 provides that no claim existing on the effective date of the act shall be barred for a period of one year.”
McClanahan v. Am. Gilsonite Co., 494 F. Supp. 1334 (D. Colo. 1980). · cites it 3× “Such legal representative or his successor in trust, in any event shall be allowed not less than two years after his appointment within which to take action on behalf of such person under disability, even though the two-year period expires after the expiration of the period…”
Terry v. Sullivan, 58 P.3d 1098 (Colo. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 3× “As pertinent here, under § 13-81-101(3), C.R.S.2001, a “person under disability” includes “a mental incompetent.”
Francis RUDNICKI & Pamela Rudnicki, as parents, guardians & next friends of Alexander Rudnicki, a minor child v. Peter BIANCO, D.O., 501 P.3d 776 (Colo. 2021). · cites it 5× “This limitations period is tolled, however, with regard to " [a] person otherwise under disability as defined in section 13-81-101 [, C.R.S. ( 2021 ) ] , in which case the action may be maintained within the time period as provided in section 13-81-103 [, C.”
Neiberger v. Hawkins, 208 F.R.D. 301 (D. Colo. 2002). · cites it 2× “See Colo.Rev.Stat. § 13-81-101(3). Colo.Rev.Stat.”
Haberkorn v. ROHM-GMBH, 709 P.2d 44 (Colo. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 11× “and defined in § 13-81-101(2), C.R.S. had been appointed, we hold that plaintiff is a person under disability, and the four-year limitation applicable to warranty claims had not begun to run against him.”
Pub. Serv. Co. of Colorado v. Barnhill, 690 P.2d 1248 (Colo. 1984). · cites it 2× “does not dispute the trial court’s conclusion that plaintiff was suffering from just such a disability as is contemplated by section 13-81-101(3). That statute is applicable by its terms to “any” statute of limitations.”
Bartlett v. Elgin, 973 P.2d 694 (Colo. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 8× “Section 13-81-101, C.R.S.1997. If a person under disability is represented by a legal representative at the time the right accrues, or if a legal representative is appointed for such person at any time after the right accrues and prior to the termination of such disability, the…”
Show all 29 citing cases →
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-81-101(1) — 4 cases
Tenney v. Flaxer, 727 P.2d 1079 (Colo. 1986). “greed, concluding that if plaintiff Southard were found on remand to be under a disability sufficient to invoke the general tolling provisions of section 13-81-103(1)(a), his claim would not be barred, since that provision also applied to the limitations period for medical…”
Southard ex rel. Southard v. Miles, 714 P.2d 891 (Colo. 1986).
Southard by & Through Southard v. Miles, 714 P.2d 891 (Colo. 1986).
John Nicola v. City of Grand Junction, 544 P.3d 120 (Colo. Ct. App. 2023).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-81-101(2) — 9 cases
Elgin v. Bartlett, 994 P.2d 411 (Colo. 1999). “2 The two-year statute of limitations applicable to negligence of a health care professional is tolled with regard to “a person otherwise under disability as defined in section 13-81-101, in which case the action may be maintained within the time period as provided in section…”
Tenney v. Flaxer, 727 P.2d 1079 (Colo. 1986). “greed, concluding that if plaintiff Southard were found on remand to be under a disability sufficient to invoke the general tolling provisions of section 13-81-103(1)(a), his claim would not be barred, since that provision also applied to the limitations period for medical…”
Bartlett v. Elgin, 973 P.2d 694 (Colo. Ct. App. 1999). “Section 13-81-101, C.R.S.1997. If a person under disability is represented by a legal representative at the time the right accrues, or if a legal representative is appointed for such person at any time after the right accrues and prior to the termination of such disability, the…”
Southard ex rel. Southard v. Miles, 714 P.2d 891 (Colo. 1986).
Southard by & Through Southard v. Miles, 714 P.2d 891 (Colo. 1986).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-81-101(3) — 22 cases
Broyles v. Fort Lyon Canal Co., 695 P.2d 1136 (Colo. 1985). “We need not decide here whether the specific tolling provision in section 37-92-601 concerning conditions beyond the control of the applicant should also apply to applicants who file untimely requests for findings of reasonable diligence pursuant to the otherwise identical…”
McClanahan v. Am. Gilsonite Co., 494 F. Supp. 1334 (D. Colo. 1980). “Such legal representative or his successor in trust, in any event shall be allowed not less than two years after his appointment within which to take action on behalf of such person under disability, even though the two-year period expires after the expiration of the period…”
Terry v. Sullivan, 58 P.3d 1098 (Colo. Ct. App. 2002). “As pertinent here, under § 13-81-101(3), C.R.S.2001, a “person under disability” includes “a mental incompetent.”
Adams Cnty. Sch. Dist. No. 1 v. Dist. Court, 611 P.2d 963 (Colo. 1980). “Section 5 of the 1977 amendment to section 13-81-101 provides that no claim existing on the effective date of the act shall be barred for a period of one year.”
Neiberger v. Hawkins, 208 F.R.D. 301 (D. Colo. 2002). “See Colo.Rev.Stat. § 13-81-101(3). Colo.Rev.Stat.”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-81-101(4) — 1 case
Brown v. Teitelbaum, 830 P.2d 1081 (Colo. Ct. App. 1991).
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.