Colo. Rev. Stat. » Title 14
Colorado Revised Statutes

Colo. Rev. Stat. § 14-13-101 (2026)

Short title

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

This article shall be known and may be cited as the "Uniform Child-custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act".

Source: L. 2000: Entire article R&RE, p. 1519, § 1, effective July 1.

Editor's note: This section is similar to former § 14-13-101 as it existed prior to 2000.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 82 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1975–2025 · leading case: Hartley v. City of Colorado Springs, 764 P.2d 1216 (Colo. 1988).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Hartley v. City of Colorado Springs, 764 P.2d 1216 (Colo. 1988). · cites it 43× “Nonconforming uses in Colorado Springs are regulated by sections 14-13-101 to -105 of the Colorado Springs Zoning Code.”
People in re M.S, 2017 COA 60 (Colo. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 2× “1 We conclude dependency and neglect proceedings are subject to the Uniform Child-custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA), § 14-13-101, et. seq., C.R.S. 2016. And because the record does not demonstrate that the magistrate followed the procedures set forth in the…”
People in Interest of SB, 742 P.2d 935 (Colo. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 4× “This issue is governed principally by the provisions of the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act (UCCJA), § 14-13-101 et seq., C.R.S. Both South Carolina and Colorado have adopted the UCCJA.”
In Re State Ex Rel. MC, 94 P.3d 1220 (Colo. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 2× “We directed the district court to hold an evidentiary hearing and make findings of fact and conclusions of law on the issue of subject matter jurisdiction under the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA), § 14-13-101, et seq., C.R.S.2003. See People in…”
In Re the Marriage of Davis, 252 P.3d 530 (Colo. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 2× “Additionally, as to the parenting time and custody provisions of the Georgia order, wife filed a motion for the Colorado court to reassume jurisdiction pursuant to the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act, section 14-13-101 to -408, C.”
Of Mmv, 2020 COA 94 (Colo. Ct. App. 2020). “We must decide an issue that has not yet been addressed in Colorado — does the Uniform Child-custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA), sections 14-13-101 to -403, C.R.S. 2019, govern the termination of parental rights that is initiated in a stepparent adoption case? We…”
L.G. v. People, 890 P.2d 647 (Colo. 1995). · cites it 2× “We find that the juvenile court, acting in the best interests of the child on a State-initiated petition in dependency and neglect, had subject matter jurisdiction under the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act, codified in Colorado at section 14-13-101 to - 126, 6B C.R.S.…”
In Re the Marriage of Pritchett, 80 P.3d 918 (Colo. Ct. App. 2003). “Two weeks later, mother notified the Colorado court, pursuant to the Uniform Child-custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act, § 14-13-101, et seq., C.R.S.2002 (UCCJEA), that she had filed a motion in a North Dakota court to determine jurisdiction over custody issues.”
People Ex Rel. Ajc, 88 P.3d 599 (Colo. 2004). · cites it 6× “Colorado previously determined its jurisdiction in interstate custody disputes by reference to the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act (UCCJA), section 14-13-101, et seq., 5 C.R.S. (1999), which is no longer in place in Colorado, but which is still in place in Missouri.”
In re the Parental Responsibilities Concerning T.L.B., 272 P.3d 1148 (Colo. Ct. App. 2012). “§§ 11601 to 11611 (2006), and (2) the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act, sections 14-13-101 to -403, C.R.S.2011 (UCCJEA)-which are intended to prevent jurisdictional conflicts in child eus-tody cases.”
Petition of Edilson, 637 P.2d 362 (Colo. 1981). · cites it 2× “In her petition, filed pursuant to the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act (Act), section 14-13-101 et seq., C.R.S.1973, she alleged that: (1) she was a fit and proper person to have custody of Michael and it was in the child's best interest to have custody awarded to her;…”
Fry v. Ball, 544 P.2d 402 (Colo. 1975). · cites it 4× “Section 14-13-101, et. seq., C.R.S 1973. A rule to show cause issued and we now make the rule absolute.”
Show all 82 citing cases →
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 14-13-101(E) — 1 case
Hartley v. City of Colorado Springs, 764 P.2d 1216 (Colo. 1988). “Nonconforming uses in Colorado Springs are regulated by sections 14-13-101 to -105 of the Colorado Springs Zoning Code.”
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.