Colo. Rev. Stat. » Title 8
Colorado Revised Statutes

Colo. Rev. Stat. § 8-41-209 (2026)

Coverage for occupational diseases contracted by firefighters

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

(1) Death, disability, or impairment of health of a firefighter of any political subdivision who has completed five or more years of employment as a firefighter, caused by cancer of the brain, skin, digestive system, hematological system, or genitourinary system and resulting from his or her employment as a firefighter, shall be considered an occupational disease.

(2) Any condition or impairment of health described in subsection (1) of this section:

(a) Shall be presumed to result from a firefighter's employment if, at the time of becoming a firefighter or thereafter, the firefighter underwent a physical examination that failed to reveal substantial evidence of such condition or impairment of health that preexisted his or her employment as a firefighter; and

(b) Shall not be deemed to result from the firefighter's employment if the firefighter's employer or insurer shows by a preponderance of the medical evidence that such condition or impairment did not occur on the job.

(3) Repealed.

(4) An employer who participates in the voluntary firefighter cancer benefits program created in part 4 of article 5 of title 29 is not subject to this section unless the employer ends participation in that program.

Source: L. 2007: Entire section added, p. 962, § 1, effective May 17. L. 2017: (4) added, (SB 17-214), ch. 187, p. 684, § 2, effective May 3.

Editor's note: Subsection (3)(b) provided for the repeal of subsection (3), effective March 1, 2009. (See L. 2007, p. 962.)

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases, 2012–2018 · leading case: City of Littleton v. Indus. Claim Appeals Off., 2016 CO 25 (Colo. 2016).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
City of Littleton v. Indus. Claim Appeals Off., 2016 CO 25 (Colo. 2016). · cites it 148× “He (and later his widow and child) sought workers’ compensation benefits to cover his cancer treatment, asserting that his brain cancer qualified as a compensable occupational disease under the "firefighter statute," § 8-41-209, C.R.S. (2015), of the Workers’ Compensation Act of…”
City of Littleton v. Indus. Claim Appeals Off., 370 P.3d 157 (Colo. 2016). · cites it 114× “Whether the court of appeals erred in its interpretation of section 8-41-209, C.R.S., in determining that the statute is effectively ir-rebuttable, contrary to the intent of the General Assembly and the unambiguous, wording of the statute.”
Indus. Claim Appeals Off. v. Town of Castle Rock & Cirsa, 370 P.3d 151 (Colo. 2016). · cites it 70× “He sought both medical benefits and temporary total disability benefits under the "firefighter statute," § 8-41-209, C.R.S. (2015), of the Workers' Compensation Act of Colorado, asserting that his melanoma qualified as a compensable occupational disease.”
Town of Castle Rock & Cirsa v. Indus. Claim Appeals Off., 373 P.3d 609 (Colo. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 29× “Opinion by JUDGE GRAHAM T 1 This workers' compensation action raises a question of statutory interpretation: What evidence overcomes the statutory presumption of compensability articulated in section 8-41-209, C.R.8.2012? The statute provides that certain cancers contracted by…”
Indus. Claim Appeals Off. v. Town of Castle Rock, 2016 CO 26 (Colo. 2016). · cites it 81× “He sought both medical benefits and temporary total disability benefits under the "firefighter statute," § 8-41-209, C.R.S. (2015), of the Workers’ Compensation Act of Colorado, asserting that his melanoma qualified as a compensable occupational disease.”
City of Boulder v. ICAO, 2018 COA 93 (Colo. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 6× “When the judge did not do so, the City continues, he did not follow a trio of Colorado Supreme Court opinions that had interpreted section 8-41-209, C.R.S. 2017, which we will shorten to “section 209,” and its statutory presumption.”
Indus. Claim Appeals Off. v. Town of Castle Rock, 2016 CO 26 (Colo. 2016). · cites it 162× “He sought both medical benefits and temporary total disability benefits under the "firefighter statute," § 8-41-209, C.R.S. (2015), of the Workers’ Compensation Act of Colorado, asserting that his melanoma qualified as a compensable occupational disease.”
City of Englewood v. Harrell, 2016 CO 27 (Colo. 2016). · cites it 15× “3d , both announced today, we set forth our interpretation of section 8-41-209, C.R.S. (2015), of the Workers’ Compensation Act of Colorado, which provides workers’ compensation coverage, under certain conditions, for occupational diseases affecting firefighters.”
City & Cnty. of Denver v. Indus. Claim Appeals Off., 328 P.3d 313 (Colo. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 19× “Opinion by JUDGE GRAHAM 1 1 This case raises a question of statutory interpretation that has not yet been addressed by any division of this court or by the Colorado Supreme Court: What constitutes "employment" for purposes of calculating the five-year time period under the…”
City of Littleton v. Indus. Claim Appeals Off. of Colo., 412 P.3d 440 (Colo. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 47× “See § 8-41-209, C.R.S.2012. But she ruled that Littleton had proved that claimant's cancer was "not caused by his occupational exposures.”
City of Englewood v. Harrell, 2016 CO 27 (Colo. 2016). · cites it 15× “3d , both announced today, we set forth our interpretation of section 8-41-209, C.R.S. (2015), of the Workers’ Compensation Act of Colorado, which provides workers’ compensation coverage, under certain conditions, for occupational diseases affecting firefighters.”
City of Englewood v. Harrell, 370 P.3d 149 (Colo. 2016). · cites it 12× “announced today, we set forth our interpretation of section 8-41-209, C.R.S. (2015), of the Workers' Compensation Act of Colorado, which provides workers' compensation coverage, under certain conditions, for occupatmn— al diseases affecting firefighters.”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 8-41-209(1) — 8 cases
City of Littleton v. Indus. Claim Appeals Off., 370 P.3d 157 (Colo. 2016). “Whether the court of appeals erred in its interpretation of section 8-41-209, C.R.S., in determining that the statute is effectively ir-rebuttable, contrary to the intent of the General Assembly and the unambiguous, wording of the statute.”
City of Littleton v. Indus. Claim Appeals Off., 2016 CO 25 (Colo. 2016). “He (and later his widow and child) sought workers’ compensation benefits to cover his cancer treatment, asserting that his brain cancer qualified as a compensable occupational disease under the "firefighter statute," § 8-41-209, C.R.S. (2015), of the Workers’ Compensation Act of…”
Indus. Claim Appeals Off. v. Town of Castle Rock & Cirsa, 370 P.3d 151 (Colo. 2016). “He sought both medical benefits and temporary total disability benefits under the "firefighter statute," § 8-41-209, C.R.S. (2015), of the Workers' Compensation Act of Colorado, asserting that his melanoma qualified as a compensable occupational disease.”
Town of Castle Rock & Cirsa v. Indus. Claim Appeals Off., 373 P.3d 609 (Colo. Ct. App. 2013). “Opinion by JUDGE GRAHAM T 1 This workers' compensation action raises a question of statutory interpretation: What evidence overcomes the statutory presumption of compensability articulated in section 8-41-209, C.R.8.2012? The statute provides that certain cancers contracted by…”
Indus. Claim Appeals Off. v. Town of Castle Rock, 2016 CO 26 (Colo. 2016). “He sought both medical benefits and temporary total disability benefits under the "firefighter statute," § 8-41-209, C.R.S. (2015), of the Workers’ Compensation Act of Colorado, asserting that his melanoma qualified as a compensable occupational disease.”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 8-41-209(2) — 6 cases
City of Littleton v. Indus. Claim Appeals Off., 2016 CO 25 (Colo. 2016). “He (and later his widow and child) sought workers’ compensation benefits to cover his cancer treatment, asserting that his brain cancer qualified as a compensable occupational disease under the "firefighter statute," § 8-41-209, C.R.S. (2015), of the Workers’ Compensation Act of…”
City of Littleton v. Indus. Claim Appeals Off., 370 P.3d 157 (Colo. 2016). “Whether the court of appeals erred in its interpretation of section 8-41-209, C.R.S., in determining that the statute is effectively ir-rebuttable, contrary to the intent of the General Assembly and the unambiguous, wording of the statute.”
Indus. Claim Appeals Off. v. Town of Castle Rock & Cirsa, 370 P.3d 151 (Colo. 2016). “He sought both medical benefits and temporary total disability benefits under the "firefighter statute," § 8-41-209, C.R.S. (2015), of the Workers' Compensation Act of Colorado, asserting that his melanoma qualified as a compensable occupational disease.”
Indus. Claim Appeals Off. v. Town of Castle Rock, 2016 CO 26 (Colo. 2016). “He sought both medical benefits and temporary total disability benefits under the "firefighter statute," § 8-41-209, C.R.S. (2015), of the Workers’ Compensation Act of Colorado, asserting that his melanoma qualified as a compensable occupational disease.”
Town of Castle Rock & Cirsa v. Indus. Claim Appeals Off., 373 P.3d 609 (Colo. Ct. App. 2013). “Opinion by JUDGE GRAHAM T 1 This workers' compensation action raises a question of statutory interpretation: What evidence overcomes the statutory presumption of compensability articulated in section 8-41-209, C.R.8.2012? The statute provides that certain cancers contracted by…”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 8-41-209(2)(a) — 9 cases
City of Littleton v. Indus. Claim Appeals Off., 2016 CO 25 (Colo. 2016). “He (and later his widow and child) sought workers’ compensation benefits to cover his cancer treatment, asserting that his brain cancer qualified as a compensable occupational disease under the "firefighter statute," § 8-41-209, C.R.S. (2015), of the Workers’ Compensation Act of…”
City of Littleton v. Indus. Claim Appeals Off., 370 P.3d 157 (Colo. 2016). “Whether the court of appeals erred in its interpretation of section 8-41-209, C.R.S., in determining that the statute is effectively ir-rebuttable, contrary to the intent of the General Assembly and the unambiguous, wording of the statute.”
Indus. Claim Appeals Off. v. Town of Castle Rock & Cirsa, 370 P.3d 151 (Colo. 2016). “He sought both medical benefits and temporary total disability benefits under the "firefighter statute," § 8-41-209, C.R.S. (2015), of the Workers' Compensation Act of Colorado, asserting that his melanoma qualified as a compensable occupational disease.”
Indus. Claim Appeals Off. v. Town of Castle Rock, 2016 CO 26 (Colo. 2016). “He sought both medical benefits and temporary total disability benefits under the "firefighter statute," § 8-41-209, C.R.S. (2015), of the Workers’ Compensation Act of Colorado, asserting that his melanoma qualified as a compensable occupational disease.”
Indus. Claim Appeals Off. v. Town of Castle Rock, 2016 CO 26 (Colo. 2016). “He sought both medical benefits and temporary total disability benefits under the "firefighter statute," § 8-41-209, C.R.S. (2015), of the Workers’ Compensation Act of Colorado, asserting that his melanoma qualified as a compensable occupational disease.”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 8-41-209(2)(b) — 10 cases
City of Littleton v. Indus. Claim Appeals Off., 2016 CO 25 (Colo. 2016). “He (and later his widow and child) sought workers’ compensation benefits to cover his cancer treatment, asserting that his brain cancer qualified as a compensable occupational disease under the "firefighter statute," § 8-41-209, C.R.S. (2015), of the Workers’ Compensation Act of…”
City of Littleton v. Indus. Claim Appeals Off., 370 P.3d 157 (Colo. 2016). “Whether the court of appeals erred in its interpretation of section 8-41-209, C.R.S., in determining that the statute is effectively ir-rebuttable, contrary to the intent of the General Assembly and the unambiguous, wording of the statute.”
Town of Castle Rock & Cirsa v. Indus. Claim Appeals Off., 373 P.3d 609 (Colo. Ct. App. 2013). “Opinion by JUDGE GRAHAM T 1 This workers' compensation action raises a question of statutory interpretation: What evidence overcomes the statutory presumption of compensability articulated in section 8-41-209, C.R.8.2012? The statute provides that certain cancers contracted by…”
Indus. Claim Appeals Off. v. Town of Castle Rock & Cirsa, 370 P.3d 151 (Colo. 2016). “He sought both medical benefits and temporary total disability benefits under the "firefighter statute," § 8-41-209, C.R.S. (2015), of the Workers' Compensation Act of Colorado, asserting that his melanoma qualified as a compensable occupational disease.”
Indus. Claim Appeals Off. v. Town of Castle Rock, 2016 CO 26 (Colo. 2016). “He sought both medical benefits and temporary total disability benefits under the "firefighter statute," § 8-41-209, C.R.S. (2015), of the Workers’ Compensation Act of Colorado, asserting that his melanoma qualified as a compensable occupational disease.”
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.