Colorado Revised Statutes

Colo. Rev. Stat. § 38-33.3-203 (2026)

Construction and validity of declaration and bylaws

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CO-LEGleg.colorado.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(1) All provisions of the declaration and bylaws are severable.

(2) The rule against perpetuities does not apply to defeat any provision of the declaration, bylaws, or rules and regulations.

(3) In the event of a conflict between the provisions of the declaration and the bylaws, the declaration prevails, except to the extent the declaration is inconsistent with this article.

(4) Title to a unit and common elements is not rendered unmarketable or otherwise affected by reason of an insubstantial failure of the declaration to comply with this article. Whether a substantial failure impairs marketability is not affected by this article.

Source: L. 91: Entire article added, p. 1716, § 1, effective July 1, 1992.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 5 cases, 2004–2016 · leading case: Silverview at Overlook, LLC v. Overlook at Mt. Crested Butte Ltd. Liab. Co., 97 P.3d 252 (Colo. Ct. App. 2004).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Silverview at Overlook, LLC v. Overlook at Mt. Crested Butte Ltd. Liab. Co., 97 P.3d 252 (Colo. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 7× “Section 38-33.3-203(1), C.R.S.2003, states that “[a]ll provisions of the declaration and bylaws are severable.”

Heritage Vill. Owners Ass'n v. Golden Heritage Investors, Ltd., 89 P.3d 513 (Colo. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 4× “” Section 38-33.3-203(3), C.R.S. 2003. We read § 38-33.”

Ryan Ranch Cmty. Ass'n, Inc. v. Kelley, 2016 CO 65 (Colo. 2016). · cites it 6× “According to the Association, any improper indexing was a clerical error that did not prejudice Respondents because Respondents had notice of the various documents that, 14We also reject the Association’s contention that any failure to reallocate the allocated interests is an…”

In re Williamson Vill. Condos., 653 S.E.2d 900 (N.C. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 3× “at 255-56 (quoting Colo.Rev.Stat. § 38-33.3-203(4) (2003)). The appellate court disagreed.”

Perfect Place, LLC v. Semler, 2016 COA 152 (Colo. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 2× “For example, § 38-33.3-203(4), C.R.S. 2016, states: “Title to a unit and common elements is not rendered unmarketable or otherwise affected by reason of an insubstantial failure of the declaration to comply with this article.”

— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 38-33.3-203(1) — 1 case

Silverview at Overlook, LLC v. Overlook at Mt. Crested Butte Ltd. Liab. Co., 97 P.3d 252 (Colo. Ct. App. 2004). “Section 38-33.3-203(1), C.R.S.2003, states that “[a]ll provisions of the declaration and bylaws are severable.”

— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 38-33.3-203(3) — 1 case

Heritage Vill. Owners Ass'n v. Golden Heritage Investors, Ltd., 89 P.3d 513 (Colo. Ct. App. 2004). “” Section 38-33.3-203(3), C.R.S. 2003. We read § 38-33.”

— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 38-33.3-203(4) — 4 cases

Ryan Ranch Cmty. Ass'n, Inc. v. Kelley, 2016 CO 65 (Colo. 2016). “According to the Association, any improper indexing was a clerical error that did not prejudice Respondents because Respondents had notice of the various documents that, 14We also reject the Association’s contention that any failure to reallocate the allocated interests is an…”

In re Williamson Vill. Condos., 653 S.E.2d 900 (N.C. Ct. App. 2007). “at 255-56 (quoting Colo.Rev.Stat. § 38-33.3-203(4) (2003)). The appellate court disagreed.”

Perfect Place, LLC v. Semler, 2016 COA 152 (Colo. Ct. App. 2016). “For example, § 38-33.3-203(4), C.R.S. 2016, states: “Title to a unit and common elements is not rendered unmarketable or otherwise affected by reason of an insubstantial failure of the declaration to comply with this article.”

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.