Colo. Rev. Stat. » Title 18
Colorado Revised Statutes

Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-17-101 (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 "Colorado Organized Crime Control Act".

Source: L. 81: Entire article added, p. 1015, § 1, effective July 1.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 74 cases (10 in the last 5 years), 1981–2026 · leading case: In Re the Custody of C.J.S., 37 P.3d 479 (Colo. Ct. App. 2001).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
In Re the Custody of C.J.S., 37 P.3d 479 (Colo. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 2× “On appeal, mother requests attorney fees pursuant to § 18-17-101, C.R.S.2000, and damages pursuant to C.”
v. People, 2019 CO 87 (Colo. 2019). “These two convictions served as the necessary predicates for a further conviction under the Colorado Organized Crime Control Act (“COCCA”), §§ 18-17-101 to -109, C.R.S. (2019). The trial court sentenced Butler to eight years in a Community Corrections program.”
City of Holyoke v. Schlachter Farms R.L.L.P., 22 P.3d 960 (Colo. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 5× “Schlachter Farms points to no statute other than § 18-17-101, et seq., as a basis for recovering its attorney fees.”
In re the Marriage of Cardona, 321 P.3d 518 (Colo. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 3× “Thus, we deny wife's request for attorney fees incurred on appeal under section 18-17-101, C.R.S8.2010. The portions of the judgment allocating the dependency tax exemption for the children, dividing the marital property, awarding maintenance, awarding child support, and…”
Brooks v. Bank of Boulder, 891 F. Supp. 1469 (D. Colo. 1995). · cites it 4× “COCCA Claims (Colo.Rev.Stat. § 18-17-101(1) (a) (1986)) (Claims 7 and 8).”
L-3 Commc'ns Corp. v. Jaxon Eng'g & Maint., Inc., 863 F. Supp. 2d 1066 (D. Colo. 2012). · cites it 2× “, in that Jaxon (and its participation with certain individual Defendants) constitutes an “enterprise,” in furtherance of which the various Defendants have engaged in a pattern of predicate criminal offenses of mail and wire fraud; (ii) conspiracy to violate RICO, based on…”
Jones v. Marquis Props., LLC, 212 F. Supp. 3d 1010 (D. Colo. 2016). · cites it 2× “Treble Damages Claims Plaintiffs assert various other claims against Marquis: violation of RICO (Count One); fraud (Count Two); civil theft under Colorado Revised Statute § 18-4-405 (Count Three); violation of the Colorado Organized Crime Control Act (“COCCA”), Colo. Rev. Stat.…”
Tara Woods Ltd. P'ship v. Fannie Mae, 731 F. Supp. 2d 1103 (D. Colo. 2010). · cites it 2× “by disparaging the property of the [the Plaintiff]”; (viii) negligent supervision, apparently under Colorado common law, in that they failed to ensure that their employees “perform[ed] their duties such that their conduct would not be in violation of the loan agreements and as…”
Yaekle v. Andrews, 169 P.3d 196 (Colo. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 2× “" Defendants argue that attorney fees could have been awarded under either a fee-shifting provision in the December revised settlement agreement or § 18-17-101, et seq., C.R.$.2006. However, the trial court did not identify the basis for awarding fees, made no factual findings…”
Allstate Ins. Co. v. Huizar, 52 P.3d 816 (Colo. 2002). “See § 18-17-101, 5 CRS. In this case, litigation over the validity of the previously untested trial de novo provision of the insurance policy was clearly not groundless.”
Super Valu Stores, Inc. v. Dist. Court in & for Weld Cnty., 906 P.2d 72 (Colo. 1995). “The complaint 2 contained twenty-two claims for relief, including claims of common law fraud, breach of contract, breach of confidential relationship, and violations of the Colorado Organized Crime Control Act, §§ 18-17-101 to -109, 8B C.R.S. (1986 & 1994 Supp.”
Youngs v. Indus. Claim Appeals Off., 297 P.3d 964 (Colo. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 2× “Article 17 applies only to "courts of record," § 18-17-101, C.R.S.2011, which does not include ALJs and the Panel.”
Show all 74 citing cases →
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-17-101(1) — 2 cases
Brooks v. Bank of Boulder, 891 F. Supp. 1469 (D. Colo. 1995). “COCCA Claims (Colo.Rev.Stat. § 18-17-101(1) (a) (1986)) (Claims 7 and 8).”
Moore v. DeBruine, 631 P.2d 1194 (Colo. Ct. App. 1981).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-17-101(3) — 2 cases
Brooks v. Bank of Boulder, 891 F. Supp. 1469 (D. Colo. 1995). “COCCA Claims (Colo.Rev.Stat. § 18-17-101(1) (a) (1986)) (Claims 7 and 8).”
Brooks v. Bank of Boulder, 911 F. Supp. 470 (D. Colo. 1996).
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.