Colorado Revised Statutes
Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-34-402.5 (2026)
Unlawful prohibition of legal activities as a condition of employment
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
CO-LEGleg.colorado.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
(1) It shall be a discriminatory or unfair employment practice for an employer to terminate the employment of any employee due to that employee's engaging in any lawful activity off the premises of the employer during nonworking hours unless such a restriction:
(a) Relates to a bona fide occupational requirement or is reasonably and rationally related to the employment activities and responsibilities of a particular employee or a particular group of employees, rather than to all employees of the employer; or
(b) Is necessary to avoid a conflict of interest with any responsibilities to the employer or the appearance of such a conflict of interest.
(2) (a) Notwithstanding any other provisions of this article, the sole remedy for any person claiming to be aggrieved by a discriminatory or unfair employment practice as defined in this section shall be as follows: He or she may bring a civil action for damages in any district court of competent jurisdiction and may sue for all wages and benefits that would have been due him or her up to and including the date of the judgment had the discriminatory or unfair employment practice not occurred; except that nothing in this section shall be construed to relieve the person from the obligation to mitigate his or her damages.
(b) (I) If the prevailing party in the civil action is the plaintiff, the court shall award the plaintiff court costs and a reasonable attorney fee.
(II) This paragraph (b) shall not apply to an employee of a business that has or had fifteen or fewer employees during each of twenty or more calendar work weeks in the current or preceding calendar year.
Source: L. 90: Entire section added, p. 1222, § 1, effective July 1. L. 2007: (2) amended, p. 859, § 1, effective July 1.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 43
cases (7 in the last 5 years), 1992–2025 · leading case: Coats v. Dish Network, LLC, 2015 CO 44 (Colo. 2015).
Coats v. Dish Network, LLC, 2015 CO 44 (Colo. 2015). “T2 Here, petitioner Brandon Coats claims respondent Dish Network, LLC ("Dish") violated section 24-34-402.5 by discharging him due to his state-licensed use of medical mariJuana at home during nonworking hours.”
Watson v. Pub. Serv. Co. of Colorado, 207 P.3d 860 (Colo. Ct. App. 2008). “2008, applies to lawful, off-duty conduct, even if work-related; that the judgment must be vacated because the back pay remedy under section 24-34-402.5 is equitable, and thus Watson's claim was not triable to a jury; and that, for the same reason, if the court enters a judgment…”
Coats v. Dish Network, L.L.C., 303 P.3d 147 (Colo. Ct. App. 2013). “" 2 We also address whether a section 24-34-402.5 claim is equivalent to a tort for purposes of the mandatory attorney fees provision of section 18-17-201, C.”
People v. McKnight, 2019 CO 36 (Colo. 2019). “3d 849, 853 , we addressed the similar question whether the General Assembly intended to extend the protections for “lawful” activities afforded by section 24-34-402.5, C.R.S. (2018), to activities made lawful under state law but remaining unlawful under federal law.”
Borquez v. Robert C. Ozer, PC, 923 P.2d 166 (Colo. Ct. App. 1996). “We have already concluded that the jury verdict on the wrongful discharge claim is supportable based upon a violation of § 24-34-402.5, C.R.S. (1995 Cum.Supp.). The record does not support the trial court's conclusion that the wrongful discharge claim was not litigated, at least…”
Butler v. Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners for San Miguel Cnty., 2021 COA 32 (Colo. Ct. App. 2021). “¶ 12 Section 24-34-402.5, titled “[u]nlawful prohibition of legal activities as a condition of employment,” provides that [i]t shall be a discriminatory or unfair employment practice for an employer to terminate the employment of any employee due 6 to that employee’s engaging in…”
IN RE the MARRIAGE OF Penny Brabb TURILLI, & Cross-Appellee, & Steven Daniel Turilli, &, 507 P.3d 83 (Colo. Ct. App. 2021). “2021, "shall also recover attorney fees in the trial and appellate courts"); § 24-34-402.5(2)(b)(I), C.R.S. 2021 (a prevailing plaintiff "in the civil action" is entitled to reasonable attorney fees); § 38-12-220, C.”
Gwin v. Chesrown Chevrolet, Inc., 931 P.2d 466 (Colo. Ct. App. 1996). “) prohibiting a racially motivated termination of a contract (§ 1981); (3) § 24-34-402.5, C.R.S. (1995 Cum.Supp.) prohibiting the termination of an employee for lawful activity engaged in away from and not during employment (§ 24-34-402.”
People v. Crouse, 388 P.3d 39 (Colo. 2017). “In Coats, we considered how Colorado’s medical marijuana law interacted with section 24-34-402.5, C.R.S. (2014), which prohibits an employer from terminating an employee for his or her “lawful” outside of work activities.”
Robert C. Ozer, PC v. Borquez, 940 P.2d 371 (Colo. 1997). “We granted certiorari to address the following issues: (1) whether the court of appeals correctly held that the jury verdict on wrongful discharge based on sexual orientation was supportable as a violation of section 24-34-402.5(1), 10A C.R.S. (1996 Supp.”
Marsh v. Delta Air Lines, Inc., 952 F. Supp. 1458 (D. Colo. 1997). “Colo.Rev.Stat. § 24-34-402.5, which became effective on July 1, 1990, protects employees who are engaging in a legal activity from being punished by their employer.”
Galvan v. Spanish Peaks Reg'l Health Ctr., 98 P.3d 949 (Colo. Ct. App. 2004). “On February 7, 2002, plaintiff brought this action claiming race discrimination and termination for engaging in lawful off-the-job conduct under § 24-34-402.5, C©.R.S.2008. The trial court subsequently held a hearing on whether plaintiff's claims were barred by the applicable…”
Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-34-402.5(1): 13 cases
Borquez v. Robert C. Ozer, PC, 923 P.2d 166 (Colo. Ct. App. 1996). “We have already concluded that the jury verdict on the wrongful discharge claim is supportable based upon a violation of § 24-34-402.5, C.R.S. (1995 Cum.Supp.). The record does not support the trial court's conclusion that the wrongful discharge claim was not litigated, at least…”
Robert C. Ozer, PC v. Borquez, 940 P.2d 371 (Colo. 1997). “We granted certiorari to address the following issues: (1) whether the court of appeals correctly held that the jury verdict on wrongful discharge based on sexual orientation was supportable as a violation of section 24-34-402.5(1), 10A C.R.S. (1996 Supp.”
Watson v. Pub. Serv. Co. of Colorado, 207 P.3d 860 (Colo. Ct. App. 2008). “2008, applies to lawful, off-duty conduct, even if work-related; that the judgment must be vacated because the back pay remedy under section 24-34-402.5 is equitable, and thus Watson's claim was not triable to a jury; and that, for the same reason, if the court enters a judgment…”
Coats v. Dish Network, LLC, 2015 CO 44 (Colo. 2015). “T2 Here, petitioner Brandon Coats claims respondent Dish Network, LLC ("Dish") violated section 24-34-402.5 by discharging him due to his state-licensed use of medical mariJuana at home during nonworking hours.”
Butler v. Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners for San Miguel Cnty., 2021 COA 32 (Colo. Ct. App. 2021). “¶ 12 Section 24-34-402.5, titled “[u]nlawful prohibition of legal activities as a condition of employment,” provides that [i]t shall be a discriminatory or unfair employment practice for an employer to terminate the employment of any employee due 6 to that employee’s engaging in…”
Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-34-402.5(1)(a): 7 cases
Coats v. Dish Network, L.L.C., 303 P.3d 147 (Colo. Ct. App. 2013). “" 2 We also address whether a section 24-34-402.5 claim is equivalent to a tort for purposes of the mandatory attorney fees provision of section 18-17-201, C.”
Watson v. Pub. Serv. Co. of Colorado, 207 P.3d 860 (Colo. Ct. App. 2008). “2008, applies to lawful, off-duty conduct, even if work-related; that the judgment must be vacated because the back pay remedy under section 24-34-402.5 is equitable, and thus Watson's claim was not triable to a jury; and that, for the same reason, if the court enters a judgment…”
Butler v. Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners for San Miguel Cnty., 2021 COA 32 (Colo. Ct. App. 2021). “¶ 12 Section 24-34-402.5, titled “[u]nlawful prohibition of legal activities as a condition of employment,” provides that [i]t shall be a discriminatory or unfair employment practice for an employer to terminate the employment of any employee due 6 to that employee’s engaging in…”
Williams v. Rock-Tenn Servs., Inc, 2016 COA 18 (Colo. Ct. App. 2016).
Ruiz v. Hope for Child., Inc., 352 P.3d 983 (Colo. Ct. App. 2013).
Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-34-402.5(1)(b): 2 cases
Ruiz v. Hope for Child., Inc., 352 P.3d 983 (Colo. Ct. App. 2013).
Oransky v. Martin Marietta Materials, Inc. (D. Colo. 2019).
Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-34-402.5(2): 2 cases
Langseth v. Cnty. of Elbert, 916 P.2d 655 (Colo. Ct. App. 1996).
v. LHM Corp., 2020 COA 53 (Colo. Ct. App. 2020).
Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-34-402.5(2)(a): 9 cases
Watson v. Pub. Serv. Co. of Colorado, 207 P.3d 860 (Colo. Ct. App. 2008). “2008, applies to lawful, off-duty conduct, even if work-related; that the judgment must be vacated because the back pay remedy under section 24-34-402.5 is equitable, and thus Watson's claim was not triable to a jury; and that, for the same reason, if the court enters a judgment…”
Borquez v. Robert C. Ozer, PC, 923 P.2d 166 (Colo. Ct. App. 1996). “We have already concluded that the jury verdict on the wrongful discharge claim is supportable based upon a violation of § 24-34-402.5, C.R.S. (1995 Cum.Supp.). The record does not support the trial court's conclusion that the wrongful discharge claim was not litigated, at least…”
Coats v. Dish Network, LLC, 2015 CO 44 (Colo. 2015). “T2 Here, petitioner Brandon Coats claims respondent Dish Network, LLC ("Dish") violated section 24-34-402.5 by discharging him due to his state-licensed use of medical mariJuana at home during nonworking hours.”
Butler v. Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners for San Miguel Cnty., 2021 COA 32 (Colo. Ct. App. 2021). “¶ 12 Section 24-34-402.5, titled “[u]nlawful prohibition of legal activities as a condition of employment,” provides that [i]t shall be a discriminatory or unfair employment practice for an employer to terminate the employment of any employee due 6 to that employee’s engaging in…”
Galvan v. Spanish Peaks Reg'l Health Ctr., 98 P.3d 949 (Colo. Ct. App. 2004). “On February 7, 2002, plaintiff brought this action claiming race discrimination and termination for engaging in lawful off-the-job conduct under § 24-34-402.5, C©.R.S.2008. The trial court subsequently held a hearing on whether plaintiff's claims were barred by the applicable…”
Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-34-402.5(2)(b): 3 cases
Borquez v. Robert C. Ozer, PC, 923 P.2d 166 (Colo. Ct. App. 1996). “We have already concluded that the jury verdict on the wrongful discharge claim is supportable based upon a violation of § 24-34-402.5, C.R.S. (1995 Cum.Supp.). The record does not support the trial court's conclusion that the wrongful discharge claim was not litigated, at least…”
Watson v. Pub. Serv. Co. of Colorado, 207 P.3d 860 (Colo. Ct. App. 2008). “2008, applies to lawful, off-duty conduct, even if work-related; that the judgment must be vacated because the back pay remedy under section 24-34-402.5 is equitable, and thus Watson's claim was not triable to a jury; and that, for the same reason, if the court enters a judgment…”
Gwin v. Chesrown Chevrolet, Inc., 931 P.2d 466 (Colo. Ct. App. 1996). “) prohibiting a racially motivated termination of a contract (§ 1981); (3) § 24-34-402.5, C.R.S. (1995 Cum.Supp.) prohibiting the termination of an employee for lawful activity engaged in away from and not during employment (§ 24-34-402.”
Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-34-402.5(2)(b)(I): 1 case
IN RE the MARRIAGE OF Penny Brabb TURILLI, & Cross-Appellee, & Steven Daniel Turilli, &, 507 P.3d 83 (Colo. Ct. App. 2021). “2021, "shall also recover attorney fees in the trial and appellate courts"); § 24-34-402.5(2)(b)(I), C.R.S. 2021 (a prevailing plaintiff "in the civil action" is entitled to reasonable attorney fees); § 38-12-220, C.”
Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-34-402.5(l)(a): 3 cases
Marsh v. Delta Air Lines, Inc., 952 F. Supp. 1458 (D. Colo. 1997). “Colo.Rev.Stat. § 24-34-402.5, which became effective on July 1, 1990, protects employees who are engaging in a legal activity from being punished by their employer.”
Gwin v. Chesrown Chevrolet, Inc., 931 P.2d 466 (Colo. Ct. App. 1996). “) prohibiting a racially motivated termination of a contract (§ 1981); (3) § 24-34-402.5, C.R.S. (1995 Cum.Supp.) prohibiting the termination of an employee for lawful activity engaged in away from and not during employment (§ 24-34-402.”
Osborn v. Qwest Corp., 398 F. Supp. 2d 1161 (D. Colo. 2005).
Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-34-402.5(l)(b): 1 case
Marsh v. Delta Air Lines, Inc., 952 F. Supp. 1458 (D. Colo. 1997). “Colo.Rev.Stat. § 24-34-402.5, which became effective on July 1, 1990, protects employees who are engaging in a legal activity from being punished by their employer.”
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.