Colo. Rev. Stat. » Title 7
Colorado Revised Statutes

Colo. Rev. Stat. § 7-60-121 (2026)

Accountable as a fiduciary

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

(1) Every partner shall account to the partnership for any benefit and hold as trustee for it any profits derived by such partner without the consent of the other partners from any transaction connected with the formation, conduct, or liquidation of the partnership or from any use by such partner of its property. (2) This section applies also to the representatives of a deceased partner engaged in the liquidation of the affairs of the partnership as the personal representatives of the last surviving partner.

Source: L. 31: p. 656, § 21. CSA: C. 123, § 21. CRS 53: § 104-1-21. C.R.S. 1963: § 104-1-21. L. 2004: (1) amended, p. 1425, § 81, effective July 1.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases, 1985–2003 · leading case: Beebe v. Schwenn (In Re Schwenn), 126 B.R. 351 (D. Colo. 1991).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Beebe v. Schwenn (In Re Schwenn), 126 B.R. 351 (D. Colo. 1991). · cites it 8× “On cross motions for summary judgment, the bankruptcy court granted Beebe’s motion, concluding that Colo.Rev.Stat. § 7-60-121 creates the fiduciary relationship contemplated by 11 U.”
Yoder v. Hooper, 695 P.2d 1182 (Colo. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 5× “The trial court did not calculate damages stemming from breach of a contract; rather, it imposed a constructive trust pursuant to § 7-60-121, C.R.S., on what it found, in essence, to be partnership property usurped by Hooper in breach of his fiduciary obligations.”
Hooper v. Yoder, 737 P.2d 852 (Colo. 1987). · cites it 3× “Hooper’s action in acquiring corporate stock and taking a salary without Yoder’s consent or knowledge violated Hooper’s fiduciary duties to Yoder and can fairly be characterized as fraudulent.”
Steeby v. Fial, 765 P.2d 1081 (Colo. Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 5× “This principle is codified in § 7-60-121, C.R.S. (1986 Repl.Vol. 3A), which provides that: “Every partner must account to the partnership for any benefit and hold as trustee for it any profits derived by him without the consent of the other partners from any transaction…”
People v. Clayton, 728 P.2d 723 (Colo. 1986). · cites it 4× “Section 7-60-121, 3A C.R.S. (1986), states in pertinent part: Accountable as a fiduciary.”
Tucker v. Ellbogen, 793 P.2d 592 (Colo. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 3× “Section 7-60-121, C.R.S. (1986 Repl.Vol. 3A).”
Horejs v. Steele (In Re Steele), 292 B.R. 422 (Bankr.D. Colo. 2003). · cites it 2× “” Colo.Rev.Stat. § 7-60-121. Similar wording also appears in the Oklahoma and Kansas Statutes as well.”
Schaefer v. Winden (In Re Winden), 120 B.R. 570 (Bankr.D. Colo. 1990). ““As a general rule, courts will find the requisite express or technical trust when a state statute defines the relationship as a trust, or when the relationship has the typical attributes of a trust.” However, both the California and Kansas courts have held that the state…”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 7-60-121(1) — 2 cases
Hooper v. Yoder, 737 P.2d 852 (Colo. 1987). “Hooper’s action in acquiring corporate stock and taking a salary without Yoder’s consent or knowledge violated Hooper’s fiduciary duties to Yoder and can fairly be characterized as fraudulent.”
Beebe v. Schwenn (In Re Schwenn), 126 B.R. 351 (D. Colo. 1991). “On cross motions for summary judgment, the bankruptcy court granted Beebe’s motion, concluding that Colo.Rev.Stat. § 7-60-121 creates the fiduciary relationship contemplated by 11 U.”
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.