Colorado Revised Statutes
Colo. Rev. Stat. § 19-4-129 (2026)
Child support - guidelines - schedule of basic support obligations
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
CO-LEGleg.colorado.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
The provisions of section 14-10-115, C.R.S., shall apply to all child support obligations, established or modified, as part of any proceeding under this article, whether filed on or subsequent to July 1, 1988.
Source: L. 88: Entire section added, p. 746, § 15, effective July 1.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6
cases, 1989–2019 · leading case: In the Interest of D.R.Y., 885 P.2d 351 (Colo. Ct. App. 1994).
In the Interest of D.R.Y., 885 P.2d 351 (Colo. Ct. App. 1994). “Furthermore, § 19-4-129, C.R.S. (1994 Cum. Supp.), added in 1988, provides that the provisions of § 14-10-115 shall apply to all child support obligations, established or modified as part of any paternity proceeding, whether filed on or subsequent to July 1, 1988.”
S.F.E. ex rel. T.I.E., 981 P.2d 642 (Colo. Ct. App. 1998). “Further, §19-4-129, C.R.S.1998, provides that the provisions of §14-10-115 shall apply to all child support obligations, established or modified, as part of any paternity proceeding that is filed on or subsequent to July 1, 1988.”
In Re the Marriage of Smith, 7 P.3d 1012 (Colo. Ct. App. 2000). “See §§ 19-4-129 and 19-4-116(6)(k), C.R.S.1999 (child support guidelines apply to child support obligations established or modified in proceedings under the UPA).”
Combs v. Tibbitts, 148 P.3d 430 (Colo. Ct. App. 2006). “Any such deviation shall be accompanied by written or oral findings by the court specifying the reasons for the deviation and the presumed amount under the guideline without a deviation. Section 14-10-115(3)(a).”
M.F. ex rel. M.F. v. L.M., 780 P.2d 69 (Colo. Ct. App. 1989). “See § 19-4-129, C.R.S. (1988 Cum. Supp.) Accordingly, the order is reversed and the cause is remanded to the trial court for an evidentiary hearing on the merits of mother’s motion to modify child support.”
5 In the Interest of NJC, 2019 COA 153 (Colo. Ct. App. 2019). “2 ¶ 11 The juvenile court judge adopted the magistrate’s decision not to include the deferred compensation, pointing out the magistrate’s reasoning that father could not contribute to the plan, had no control over the funds, and had no guarantee he would ever receive the money.”
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.