Colorado Revised Statutes

Colo. Rev. Stat. § 8-41-204 (2026)

Injury outside of state - benefits in accordance with state law

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

If an employee who has been hired or is regularly employed in this state receives personal injuries in an accident or an occupational disease arising out of and in the course of such employment outside of this state, the employee, or such employee's dependents in case of death, shall be entitled to compensation according to the law of this state. This provision shall apply only to those injuries received by the employee within six months after leaving this state, unless, prior to the expiration of such six-month period, the employer has filed with the division notice that the employer has elected to extend such coverage for a greater period of time.

Source: L. 90: Entire article R&RE, p. 478, § 1, effective July 1.

Editor's note: This section is similar to former § 8-46-204 as it existed prior to 1990.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases, 1996–2017 · leading case: Hathaway Lighting, Inc. v. Indus. Claim Appeals Off., 143 P.3d 1187 (Colo. Ct. App. 2006).
Hathaway Lighting, Inc. v. Indus. Claim Appeals Off., 143 P.3d 1187 (Colo. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 10× “(employer), seek review of the final order issued by the Industrial Claim Appeals Office (Panel) determining that there was no jurisdiction under § 8-41-204, C.R.S.2005, to adjudicate claimant’s request for benefits.”
Sullivan v. Oracle Corp., 254 P.3d 237 (Cal. 2011). “These circumstances reveal no genuine basis for concluding a true conflict exists. Arguing against this conclusion, Oracle points out that Colorado’s and Arizona’s workers’ compensation statutes, like California’s, expressly have extraterritorial effect for certain resident…”
Moorhead Mach. & Boiler Co. v. Del Valle, 934 P.2d 861 (Colo. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 4× “Section 8-41-204, C.R.S. (1996 Cum.Supp.).”
Youngquist Bros. Oil & Gas, Inc. v. Miner, 2017 CO 11 (Colo. 2017). · cites it 14× “¶1 This case requires us to determine whether Colorado has jurisdiction to award benefits for out-of-state work-related injuries and impose a statutory penalty on an employer under section 8-41-204, C.R.S. (2016), when the employer is not a citizen of Colorado and has no offices…”
Youngquist Bros. Oil & Gas, Inc. v. Indus. Claim Appeals Off., 2016 COA 31 (Colo. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 6× “§ 8-41-204, C.R.S. 2015; see also Hathaway Lighting, Inc.”
Youngquist Bros. Oil & Gas, Inc. v. Indus. Claim Appeals Off., 2016 COA 31 (Colo. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 6× “The Extraterritorial Provision ¶11 Colorado has jurisdiction to award benefits for out-of-state work-related injuries if an employee was (1) hired or regularly employed in Colorado and (2) injured within six months of leaving Colorado.”
Youngquist Bros. Oil & Gas, Inc. v. Indus. Claim Appeals Off. of Colo., 411 P.3d 1001 (Colo. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 6× “The Extraterritorial Provision ¶ 12 Colorado has jurisdiction to award benefits for out-of-state work-related injuries if an employee was (1) hired or regularly employed in Colorado and (2) injured within six months of leaving Colorado.”
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.