It is the duty of the commission to see that the
constitution and statutes of this state affecting public utilities, and persons subject to article 10.1
or 10.5 of this title, the enforcement of which is not specifically vested in some other officer or
tribunal, are enforced and obeyed and that violations thereof are promptly prosecuted and
penalties due the state are recovered and collected, and to this end it may sue in the name of the
people of the state of Colorado. Upon the request of the commission, the attorney general or the
district attorney acting for the proper county or city and county shall aid in any investigation,
hearing, or trial had under articles 1 to 7 of this title and institute and prosecute actions or
proceedings for the enforcement of the constitution and statutes of this state affecting public
utilities and persons subject to article 10.1 or 10.5 of this title and for the punishment of all
violations thereof.
Source: L. 13: p. 503, § 57. C.L. § 2966. CSA: C. 137, § 57. CRS 53: § 115-7-1. C.R.S.
1963: § 115-7-1. L. 2011: Entire section amended, (HB 11-1198), ch. 127, p. 420, § 16,
effective August 10.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
9
cases, 1976–2015 · leading case:
People v. Carter, 402 P.3d 480 (Colo. Ct. App. 2015).
People v. Carter, 402 P.3d 480 (Colo. Ct. App. 2015).
· cites it 4× “See § 40-7-101, C.R.S. 2014 (“It is the duty of the commission to see that the constitution and statutes of this state affecting public utilities .”
People v. Ford, 773 P.2d 1059 (Colo. 1989).
· cites it 6× “[3] Section 40-7-101 defined obscene material as "that which, considered as a whole, predominately appeals to prurient interest, i.”
People v. Tabron, 544 P.2d 372 (Colo. 1976).
· cites it 2× “” In contrast, the Colorado statute, Section 40-7-101(1) provides: “(1) ‘Obscene’ means that which, considered as a whole, predominately appeals to prurient interest, i.”
Mountain States Tel. & Tel. Co. v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 763 P.2d 1020 (Colo. 1988).
“We reject Mountain Bell’s objection to the remedy imposed for two reasons. First, the PUC has the authority to order an appropriate remedy by virtue of its statutory duty to administer and enforce the public utilities law.”
O'Bryant v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 778 P.2d 648 (Colo. 1989).
“The statutory scheme authorizes any person to file a complaint with the PUC for an alleged violation of any order or PUC rule; and once a complaint has been filed, the PUC is not required to dismiss the complaint because of the absence of any direct damage to the complainant.”
O'BRYANT v. PUC of State of Colo., 778 P.2d 648 (Colo. 1989).
“The statutory scheme authorizes any person to file a complaint with the PUC for an alleged violation of any order or PUC rule; and once a complaint has been filed, the PUC is not required to dismiss the complaint because of the absence of any direct damage to the complainant.”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 40-7-101(1) — 2 cases
People v. Ford, 773 P.2d 1059 (Colo. 1989).
“[3] Section 40-7-101 defined obscene material as "that which, considered as a whole, predominately appeals to prurient interest, i.”
People v. Tabron, 544 P.2d 372 (Colo. 1976).
“” In contrast, the Colorado statute, Section 40-7-101(1) provides: “(1) ‘Obscene’ means that which, considered as a whole, predominately appeals to prurient interest, i.”
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.