Colo. Rev. Stat. » Title 6

Colo. Rev. Stat. § 6-1-101

Short title

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

This article shall be known and may be cited as the "Colorado Consumer Protection Act".

Source: L. 69: p. 376, § 13. C.R.S. 1963: § 55-5-13.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 173 cases (36 in the last 5 years), 1977–2026 · leading case: Hall v. Walter
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Hall v. Walter (1998) colo · cites it 8× “We address the question of whether the court of appeals properly found that the Walters had standing to bring a claim under the Colorado Consumer Protection Act, sections 6-1-101 to -511, 2 C.R.S. (1998).”
Vallagio at Inverness Residential Condominium Ass'n v. Metropolitan Homes, Inc. (2017) colo “Finally, we conclude that nothing in the Colorado Consumer Protection Act (“CCPA”), §§ 6-1-101 to -1121, C.R.S. (2016), precludes arbitration of the Association’s CCPA claims.”
Nobody in Particular Presents, Inc. v. Clear Channel Communications, Inc. (2004) cod · cites it 6× “§ 6^-105 (1999), (3) the Colorado Consumer Protection Act, Colo.Rev.Stat. § 6-1-101 (1999), and (4) Colorado common law prohibiting tor-tious interference with contracts and prospective business relations.”
Colorado Coffee Bean, LLC v. Peaberry Coffee Inc. (2010) coloctapp · cites it 2× “As relevant here, plaintiffs pleaded claims of fraudulent nondisclosure, negligent misrepresentation, alter ego, and violation of the Colorado Consumer Protection Act, sections 6-1-101 to -1120, C.R.S.2009, (CCPA) against the Peaberry defendants.”
Steak n Shake Enterprises, Inc. v. Globex Co. (2015) cod · cites it 2× “claims: (1) Count I — Declaratory Judgment — Franchise and License Agreements; (2) Count II — Injunctive Relief; (3) Count III — Breach of Contract— Franchise and License Agreements; (4) Count IV — Breach of Duty of Good Faith and Fair Dealing; (5) Count V — Breach of Contract —…”
Greenway Nutrients, Inc. v. Blackburn (2014) cod · cites it 4× “§ 1125 (a), against all Defendants; (8) common law unfair competition against all Defendants; (9) violations of the Colorado Consumer Protection Act (CCPA), C.R.S. § 6-1-101 et seq., against all Defendants; and (10) violations of the Colorado Unfair Practices Act (CUPA), C.”
In re Pharmaceutical Industry Average Wholesale Price Litigation (2008) mad · cites it 3× “Having reviewed the statutes and caselaw in those states, one by one, I conclude that the following state statutes probably do not require that plaintiff prove individual reliance as a separate element under all prongs of the statute: Colorado (Colo.Rev.Stat. § 6-1-101, et…”
Nienke v. Naiman Group, Ltd. (1992) coloctapp · cites it 8× “The law firm first argues that there was a rational basis for, and evidence supporting, its claim that in extending the $77,000 loan to Nienke, defendants engaged in deceptive trade practices proscribed by the Colorado Consumer Protection Act, § 6-1-101, C.R.S. (1992 Repl.Vol.…”
Barnett v. Elite Properties of America, Inc. (2010) coloctapp “2009; personal injury; defamation; civil conspiracy; and violation of the Colorado Consumer Protection Act (CCPA), §§ 6-1-101 to -1120, C.R.S8.2009. Classic Homes moved to compel arbitration of all of these claims.”
People v. Shifrin (2014) coloctapp “Opinion by JUDGE WEBB € 1 In this action under the Colorado Consumer Protection Act (CCPA), sections 6-1-101 to -115, C.R.S.2018, defendant, Leonid Shifrin (defendant), appeals the judgment entered against him and in favor of the State of Colorado.”
Bristol Bay Productions, LLC v. Lampack (2013) colo “In its amended Colorado complaint, Bristol Bay brought claims against the Publishers for fraudulent - misrepresentation, fraudulent concealment, conspiracy to commit fraud, and a claim under the Colorado Consumer Protection Act, sections 6-1-101 to -1121, C.R.S. (2013), for…”
Van Rees v. Unleaded Software, Inc. (2016) colo “125 Finally, the court of appeals affirmed the dismissal of Van Rees's claim under the CCPA, §§ 6-1-101 to -1121, *609 C.R.S. (2015), for failure to allege that Unleaded's conduct "significantly impacts the public as actual or potential consumers of [its] goods, services, or…”
Show all 173 citing cases →
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 6-1-101(a) — 1 case
State Ex Rel. Suthers v. Mandatory Poster Agency, Inc. (2010) coloctapp
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.