(1) Except as otherwise agreed by the parties in writing at the time of the decree concerning the allocation of parental responsibilities with respect to a child, the person or persons with responsibility for decision-making may determine the child's upbringing, including his or her education, health care, and religious training, unless the court, after hearing and upon motion by the other party, finds that, in the absence of a specific limitation of the person's or persons' decision-making authority, the child's physical health would be endangered or the child's emotional development significantly impaired.
(2) If both parties or all contestants agree to the order or if the court finds that in the absence of the order the child's physical health would be endangered or the child's emotional development significantly impaired, the court may order the county or district welfare department to exercise continuing supervision over the case to assure that the terms relating to the allocation of parental responsibilities with respect to the child or parenting time terms of the decree are carried out.
Source: L. 71: R&RE, p. 531, § 1. C.R.S. 1963: § 46-1-30. L. 93: (2) amended, p. 580, § 13, effective July 1. L. 98: Entire section amended, p. 1388, § 17, effective February 1, 1999. L. 2015: (2) amended, (SB 15-099), ch. 99, p. 289, § 2, effective August 5.
Cross references: For the legislative declaration contained in the 1993 act amending subsection (2), see section 1 of chapter 165, Session Laws of Colorado 1993.
Notes of Decisions
In re the Marriage of Roosa, 89 P.3d 524 (Colo. Ct. App. 2004).
· cites it 2× “2003 (contemplating that decision-making includes medical issues), and § 14-10-130(1) C.R.S.2003 (expressly indicating that decision-making relates to education, health care, and religion).”
Montoya ex rel. Montoya v. Bebensee, 761 P.2d 285 (Colo. Ct. App. 1988).
· cites it 6× “Defendants’ motion to dismiss alleged, among other things, that, in light of the prerogatives accorded a custodial parent by § 14-10-130, C.R.S. (1987 RepLVol. 6B), father, who was not the custodial parent, had no standing to maintain any action on behalf of the minor children,…”
Griffin v. Griffin, 699 P.2d 407 (Colo. 1985).
· cites it 6× “In the absence of such provision, the court ruled, section 14-10-130, 6 C.R.S. (1973) provides that decisions concerning the child’s education are to be made by the custodial parent.”
In re Marriage of Thomas, 2021 COA 123, 501 P.3d 290.
· cites it 4× “When Griffin was decided, CRS § 14-10-130(1) provided that even where there was an agreement for joint decision-making, there was only one custodian who had the final say when joint decision-making failed.”
In the Interest of E.L.M.C., 100 P.3d 546 (Colo. Ct. App. 2004).
· cites it 6× “under the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and its Colorado counterpart.”
In re the Marriage of Lampton, 677 P.2d 352 (Colo. Ct. App. 1984).
· cites it 10× “Section 14-10-130(1), C.R.S. 1973. Accordingly, the custody order is reversed and the cause is remanded to the trial court with directions to amend the decree insofar as pertains to custody to provide that the mother shall have the sole custody of the child and the father's…”
In re Marriage of Wolfert, 598 P.2d 524 (Colo. Ct. App. 1979).
· cites it 6× “Section 14-10-130, C.R.S.1973. Conversely, the non-custodial parent may not force the custodial parent to provide certain religious training for the children.”
In re the Marriage of Jaeger, 883 P.2d 577 (Colo. Ct. App. 1994).
· cites it 3× “More specifically, he contends that his son’s right to receive mental health counseling through his church and husband’s right to provide such counseling have been abridged in violation of their First Amendment rights.”
In re the Marriage of Hatton, 160 P.3d 326 (Colo. Ct. App. 2007).
“Accordingly, on remand, the trial court should consider, as appropriate, options such as supervision of parenting time by the county or district welfare department or the court's probation department, under § 14-10-130(@2), C.R.S.2006; appointment of a qualified domestic…”
Rhoades v. Rhoades, 535 P.2d 1122 (Colo. 1975).
· cites it 3× “…The judgment of the district court is affirmed. MR. JUSTICE KELLEY and MR. JUSTICE ERICKSON do not participate. 1 Now section 14-10-130, C.R.S. 1973.”
Francis RUDNICKI & Pamela Rudnicki v. Peter BIANCO, 501 P.3d 776 (Colo. 2021).
· cites it 2× “" ) ; see also § 14-10-130, C.R.S. ( 2021 ) ( addressing allocation of parental responsibility, including responsibility for decisions over health care ) .”
Colo. Rev. Stat. § 14-10-130(1): 14 cases
In re the Marriage of Roosa, 89 P.3d 524 (Colo. Ct. App. 2004).
“2003 (contemplating that decision-making includes medical issues), and § 14-10-130(1) C.R.S.2003 (expressly indicating that decision-making relates to education, health care, and religion).”
In re Marriage of Thomas, 2021 COA 123, 501 P.3d 290.
“When Griffin was decided, CRS § 14-10-130(1) provided that even where there was an agreement for joint decision-making, there was only one custodian who had the final say when joint decision-making failed.”
In the Interest of E.L.M.C., 100 P.3d 546 (Colo. Ct. App. 2004).
“under the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and its Colorado counterpart.”
Griffin v. Griffin, 699 P.2d 407 (Colo. 1985).
“In the absence of such provision, the court ruled, section 14-10-130, 6 C.R.S. (1973) provides that decisions concerning the child’s education are to be made by the custodial parent.”
In re the Marriage of Lampton, 677 P.2d 352 (Colo. Ct. App. 1984).
“Section 14-10-130(1), C.R.S. 1973. Accordingly, the custody order is reversed and the cause is remanded to the trial court with directions to amend the decree insofar as pertains to custody to provide that the mother shall have the sole custody of the child and the father's…”
Colo. Rev. Stat. § 14-10-130(2): 2 cases
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.