Colo. Rev. Stat. » Title 19
Colorado Revised Statutes

Colo. Rev. Stat. § 19-1-110 (2026)

Previous orders and decrees - force and effect

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

All orders and decrees in proceedings concerning dependency and neglect, delinquency, relinquishment, adoption, paternity, or contributing to dependency or delinquency entered by the court prior to October 1, 1987, shall remain in full force and effect until modified or terminated by the court, as provided in this title.

Source: L. 87: Entire title R&RE, p. 702, § 1, effective October 1; entire section amended, p. 1827, § 1, effective August 27.

Editor's note: This section was contained in a title that was repealed and reenacted in 1987. Provisions of this section, as it existed in 1987, are similar to those contained in 19-1-113 as said section existed in 1986, the year prior to the repeal and reenactment of this title.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9 cases, 1976–1989 · leading case: People in Interest of SST, 553 P.2d 82 (Colo. Ct. App. 1976).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
People in Interest of SST, 553 P.2d 82 (Colo. Ct. App. 1976). · cites it 12× “Section 19-1-110, C.R.S. 1973. At the conclusion of any hearing conducted by a referee, he must promptly transmit to the judge all papers relating to the case along with his findings of fact and recommendations as to the disposition of the case.”
People in Interest of MCL, 671 P.2d 1339 (Colo. Ct. App. 1983). · cites it 8× “, the mother, appeals from the order of the trial court refusing to review the findings and recommendations of the commissioner in juvenile court because she failed to file a request for review within five days after the conclusion of the hearing as required under § 19-1-110,…”
People in Interest of JFC, 660 P.2d 7 (Colo. Ct. App. 1982). · cites it 4× “Defendant's sole issue on appeal is that his admission to the allegations in the petition made before a commissioner of the juvenile court in Adams County, § 19-1-110, C.R.S.1973 (1981 Cum.Supp.), were not knowingly or intelligently made and that neither he nor his mother…”
B.N.A.A. v. O.D.A., 779 P.2d 844 (Colo. 1989). · cites it 2× “The father appealed the commissioner’s ruling to the district court pursuant to section 19-1-110(5), 8B C.R.S. (1986). 2 The district court affirmed the commissioner’s *847 finding that the adoption was in the best interests of the child.”
M.E.G. v. R.B.D., 676 P.2d 1250 (Colo. Ct. App. 1983). · cites it 9× “However, in her brief in response to the order to show cause, the mother states that her motion “was not a request for review pursuant to C.R.S. 19-1-110 ... It sought a new trial, or to alter or amend the judgment, under C.”
ERS v. Oda, 779 P.2d 844 (Colo. 1989). · cites it 2× “The father appealed the commissioner's ruling to the district court pursuant to section 19-1-110(5), 8B C.R.S. (1986). [2] The district court affirmed the commissioner's *847 finding that the adoption was in the best interests of the child.”
C.T.R. ex rel. E.R. v. R.C.S., 672 P.2d 548 (Colo. Ct. App. 1983). · cites it 2× “While § 19-1-110(5), C.R.S.1973 (1982 Cum.Supp.”
G.K.D. v. R.A.D., 759 P.2d 851 (Colo. Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 2× “Upon review based on the record of the hearing before the commissioner, see § 19-1-110(5), C.R.S. (1986 Repl.Vol. 8B), the juvenile court rejected the commissioner’s findings and recommendations, finding instead, as a matter of law, that the action had not been brought within a…”
People ex rel. M.V. v. Adams Cnty. Sch. Dist. No. 50, 732 P.2d 1222 (Colo. Ct. App. 1986). “1983) In that case we held that under § 19-1-110(4) and (5), C.R.S. (1982 Cum.Supp.”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 19-1-110(1) — 1 case
M.E.G. v. R.B.D., 676 P.2d 1250 (Colo. Ct. App. 1983). “However, in her brief in response to the order to show cause, the mother states that her motion “was not a request for review pursuant to C.R.S. 19-1-110 ... It sought a new trial, or to alter or amend the judgment, under C.”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 19-1-110(4) — 3 cases
People in Interest of SST, 553 P.2d 82 (Colo. Ct. App. 1976). “Section 19-1-110, C.R.S. 1973. At the conclusion of any hearing conducted by a referee, he must promptly transmit to the judge all papers relating to the case along with his findings of fact and recommendations as to the disposition of the case.”
People in Interest of MCL, 671 P.2d 1339 (Colo. Ct. App. 1983). “, the mother, appeals from the order of the trial court refusing to review the findings and recommendations of the commissioner in juvenile court because she failed to file a request for review within five days after the conclusion of the hearing as required under § 19-1-110,…”
People ex rel. M.V. v. Adams Cnty. Sch. Dist. No. 50, 732 P.2d 1222 (Colo. Ct. App. 1986). “1983) In that case we held that under § 19-1-110(4) and (5), C.R.S. (1982 Cum.Supp.”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 19-1-110(5) — 7 cases
People in Interest of SST, 553 P.2d 82 (Colo. Ct. App. 1976). “Section 19-1-110, C.R.S. 1973. At the conclusion of any hearing conducted by a referee, he must promptly transmit to the judge all papers relating to the case along with his findings of fact and recommendations as to the disposition of the case.”
B.N.A.A. v. O.D.A., 779 P.2d 844 (Colo. 1989). “The father appealed the commissioner’s ruling to the district court pursuant to section 19-1-110(5), 8B C.R.S. (1986). 2 The district court affirmed the commissioner’s *847 finding that the adoption was in the best interests of the child.”
People in Interest of MCL, 671 P.2d 1339 (Colo. Ct. App. 1983). “, the mother, appeals from the order of the trial court refusing to review the findings and recommendations of the commissioner in juvenile court because she failed to file a request for review within five days after the conclusion of the hearing as required under § 19-1-110,…”
M.E.G. v. R.B.D., 676 P.2d 1250 (Colo. Ct. App. 1983). “However, in her brief in response to the order to show cause, the mother states that her motion “was not a request for review pursuant to C.R.S. 19-1-110 ... It sought a new trial, or to alter or amend the judgment, under C.”
ERS v. Oda, 779 P.2d 844 (Colo. 1989). “The father appealed the commissioner's ruling to the district court pursuant to section 19-1-110(5), 8B C.R.S. (1986). [2] The district court affirmed the commissioner's *847 finding that the adoption was in the best interests of the child.”
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.