(a) Remedies provided by this article are cumulative
and do not affect the availability of remedies under other law or the recognition of a foreign
support order on the basis of comity.
(b) This article does not:
(1) Provide the exclusive method of establishing or enforcing a support order under the
laws of this state; or
(2) Grant a tribunal of this state jurisdiction to render judgment or issue an order relating
to child custody or visitation in a proceeding under this article.
Source: L. 2003: Entire part amended with relocations, p. 1243, § 2, effective July 1,
2004. L. 2015: (a) amended, (HB 15-1198), ch. 173, p. 546, § 3, effective July 1.
Editor's note: In 2003, this section was formerly numbered as § 14-5-103.
14-5-105. Application of article to resident of foreign country and foreign support
proceeding. (a) A tribunal of this state shall apply parts 1 through 6 of this article and, as
applicable, part 7 of this article, to a support proceeding involving:
(1) A foreign support order;
(2) A foreign tribunal; or
(3) An obligee, obligor, or child residing in a foreign country.
(b) A tribunal of this state that is requested to recognize and enforce a support order on
the basis of comity may apply the procedural and substantive provisions of parts 1 through 6.
(c) Part 7 of this article applies only to a support proceeding under the Convention. In
such a proceeding, if a provision of part 7 of this article is inconsistent with parts 1 through 6 of
this article, part 7 of this article controls.
Source: L. 2015: Entire section added, (HB 15-1198), ch. 173, p. 546, § 4, effective July
1.
PART 2
JURISDICTION
Notes of Decisions
In Re the Marriage of Hillstrom, 126 P.3d 315 (Colo. Ct. App. 2005).
· cites it 12× “The district court reasoned as follows: The Court finds that pursuant to C.R.S. § 14-5-104, C.R.S. § 14-11-101 can be construed as a basis for conferring subject matter jurisdiction in actions brought for the purpose of establishing or enforcing a foreign support order because…”
Cnty. of Clearwater, Minn. v. Petrash, 598 P.2d 138 (Colo. 1979).
· cites it 3× “); URESA, section 14-5-104, C.R.S. 1973. But when a child is in need of support, questions relating to custody are immaterial.”
Kansas State Dep't of Soc. & Rehab. Servs. v. Henderson, 620 P.2d 60 (Colo. Ct. App. 1980).
· cites it 5× “” Section 14-5-104, C.R.S. 1973. Also, “a responding court shall not stay the proceeding or refuse a hearing under this article because of any pending or prior action or proceeding for .”
Glickman v. Mesigh, 615 P.2d 23 (Colo. 1980).
· cites it 2× “Section 14-5-104 of URESA states that the remedies provided therein are in addition to and not in substitution for any other remedies.”
Rohrer v. Kane, 609 P.2d 1121 (Colo. Ct. App. 1980).
· cites it 3× “Section 14-5-104, C.R.S.1973. In light of the purposes of the act and the legislative grant of broad powers to fashion the necessary remedies, we conclude that URESA must be liberally construed, and thus, that Colorado courts have authority to order child support under the…”
In Re the Marriage of Enewold, 709 P.2d 1385 (Colo. Ct. App. 1985).
· cites it 3× “The father first argues that the order entered in the URESA action excused him from payment of any amount in excess of the amount ordered in that action.”
Henry v. Knight, 746 P.2d 1375 (Colo. Ct. App. 1987).
· cites it 3× “Consequently, respondent’s obligation for arrearages under the Massachusetts decree must be determined by reference to that decree and the total amount of money that has been paid over the years as child support regardless of how such payments may have been obtained. II. The…”
In re the Marriage of Pruyser, 851 P.2d 919 (Colo. Ct. App. 1993).
· cites it 2× “See § 14-5-104, C.R.S. (1987 Repl.Vol. 6B). Section 14-5-119(l)(b), C.”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 14-5-104(a) — 1 case
In Re the Marriage of Hillstrom, 126 P.3d 315 (Colo. Ct. App. 2005).
“The district court reasoned as follows: The Court finds that pursuant to C.R.S. § 14-5-104, C.R.S. § 14-11-101 can be construed as a basis for conferring subject matter jurisdiction in actions brought for the purpose of establishing or enforcing a foreign support order because…”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 14-5-104(b)(1) — 1 case
In Re the Marriage of Hillstrom, 126 P.3d 315 (Colo. Ct. App. 2005).
“The district court reasoned as follows: The Court finds that pursuant to C.R.S. § 14-5-104, C.R.S. § 14-11-101 can be construed as a basis for conferring subject matter jurisdiction in actions brought for the purpose of establishing or enforcing a foreign support order because…”
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.