Colorado Revised Statutes

Colo. Rev. Stat. § 4-2-208 (2026)

Course of performance or practical construction

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

(1) Where the contract for sale involves repeated occasions for performance by either party with knowledge of the nature of the performance and opportunity for objection to it by the other, any course of performance accepted or acquiesced in without objection shall be relevant to determine the meaning of the agreement. (2) The express terms of the agreement and any such course of performance, as well as any course of dealing and usage of trade, shall be construed whenever reasonable as consistent with each other; but when such construction is unreasonable, express terms shall control course of performance and course of performance shall control both course of dealing and usage of trade (section 4-1-303). (3) Subject to the provisions of section 4-2-209 on modification and waiver, such course of performance shall be relevant to show a waiver or modification of any term inconsistent with such course of performance.

Source: L. 65: p. 1304, § 1. C.R.S. 1963: § 155-2-208. L. 2006: (2) amended, p. 490, § 6, effective September 1.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1984–2025 · leading case: KN Energy, Inc. v. Great W. Sugar Co., 698 P.2d 769 (Colo. 1985).
KN Energy, Inc. v. Great W. Sugar Co., 698 P.2d 769 (Colo. 1985). · cites it 2× “Course of performance may be used as an aid to interpretation whenever one party accepts repeated performance by the other party with knowledge of the nature of that performance and an opportunity to object to it.”
Moffat Cnty. State Bank v. Producers Livestock Mktg. Ass'n, 598 F. Supp. 1562 (D. Colo. 1984). · cites it 2× “Pursuant to Colo.Rev.Stat. § 4-2-208(3) (1973), a “course of performance shall be relevant to show a waiver or modification of any term inconsistent with such course of performance.”
Morgan Cnty. Feeders, Inc. v. McCormick, 836 P.2d 1051 (Colo. Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 3× “Section 4-2-208, C.R.S.; § 4-1-205, C.R.S.”
Colorado State Bank of Walsh v. Hoffner, 701 P.2d 151 (Colo. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 2× “In this case, the president of the bank consented to the sale of the cattle, and told a third party to go ahead with that sale.”
Carter Baron Drilling v. Badger Oil Corp., 581 F. Supp. 592 (D. Colo. 1984). · cites it 4× “C.R.S. § 4-2-208, when read in the light of § 4-2-202, performs the same function for course of performance evidence.”
Banghart Props. v. Colorado Mills (Colo. Ct. App. 2025). “; see § 4-2-208(2); see also Nelson v. Elway, 908 P.”
Jeffrey v. KN Energy, Inc., 652 F. Supp. 511 (D. Colo. 1987). · cites it 2× “This evidence raises a genuine issue of material fact as to plaintiffs’ waiver, under Colo.Rev.Stat. §§ 4-2-208(3) and 4-2-209(4), of the legal interpretation they now ask me to enforce.”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 4-2-208(1) — 1 case
Carter Baron Drilling v. Badger Oil Corp., 581 F. Supp. 592 (D. Colo. 1984). “C.R.S. § 4-2-208, when read in the light of § 4-2-202, performs the same function for course of performance evidence.”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 4-2-208(2) — 2 cases
KN Energy, Inc. v. Great W. Sugar Co., 698 P.2d 769 (Colo. 1985). “Course of performance may be used as an aid to interpretation whenever one party accepts repeated performance by the other party with knowledge of the nature of that performance and an opportunity to object to it.”
Banghart Props. v. Colorado Mills (Colo. Ct. App. 2025). “; see § 4-2-208(2); see also Nelson v. Elway, 908 P.”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 4-2-208(3) — 3 cases
Moffat Cnty. State Bank v. Producers Livestock Mktg. Ass'n, 598 F. Supp. 1562 (D. Colo. 1984). “Pursuant to Colo.Rev.Stat. § 4-2-208(3) (1973), a “course of performance shall be relevant to show a waiver or modification of any term inconsistent with such course of performance.”
Colorado State Bank of Walsh v. Hoffner, 701 P.2d 151 (Colo. Ct. App. 1985). “In this case, the president of the bank consented to the sale of the cattle, and told a third party to go ahead with that sale.”
Jeffrey v. KN Energy, Inc., 652 F. Supp. 511 (D. Colo. 1987). “This evidence raises a genuine issue of material fact as to plaintiffs’ waiver, under Colo.Rev.Stat. §§ 4-2-208(3) and 4-2-209(4), of the legal interpretation they now ask me to enforce.”
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.