As a guide to the interpretation and application of
this article, the public policy of this state is declared to be as follows: Economic insecurity due to
unemployment is a serious menace to the health, morals, and welfare of the people of this state.
Involuntary unemployment is therefore a subject of general interest and concern which requires
appropriate action by the general assembly to prevent its spread and to lighten its burden which
now so often falls with crushing force upon the unemployed worker and his family. The
achievement of social security requires protection against this greatest hazard of our economic
life. This can be provided by encouraging employers to provide more stable employment and by
the systematic accumulation of funds during periods of employment to provide benefits for
periods of unemployment, thus maintaining purchasing power and limiting the serious social
consequences of poor relief assistance. The general assembly, therefore, declares that in its
considered judgment the public good and the general welfare of the citizens of this state require
the enactment of this measure, under the police powers of the state, for the compulsory setting
aside of unemployment reserves to be used for the benefit of persons unemployed through no
fault of their own.
Source: L. 36, 3rd Ex. Sess.: p. 13, § 2. CSA: C. 167A, § 2. L. 41: p. 761, § 2. CRS 53:
§ 82-1-2. C.R.S. 1963: § 82-1-2.
Notes of Decisions
Colorado Div. of Emp. v. Accord Human Resources, Inc., 270 P.3d 985 (Colo. 2012).
· cites it 12× “See § 8-70-102, C.R.S. (2011). Thus, the Division had the authority to consider the Accord entities to be a "single employing unit" for unemployment premium collection purposes.”
Colo. Custom Maid, LLC v. Indus. Claim Appeals Off., 2019 CO 43 (Colo. 2019).
· cites it 2× “3d at 564 (explaining that the purpose of CESA is to "protect employees from the negative consequences of involuntary unemployment"); see also § 8-70-102, C.R.S. (2018) (setting out the legislative purposes of the unemployment insurance laws).”
Federico v. Brannan Sand & Gravel Co., 788 P.2d 1268 (Colo. 1990).
· cites it 4× “The Employment Security Act, title 8, articles 70 to 82 of the Colorado Revised Statutes, was enacted to protect workers who become unemployed through no fault of their own from financial hardship.”
Young Life v. Div. of Emp. & Traning, 650 P.2d 515 (Colo. 1982).
· cites it 5× “Section 8-70-102, C.R.S. 1973. That the implementation of a widespread system of social welfare may be deemed a sufficiently weighty interest to outweigh incidental burdens on religion is indicated by the United States Supreme Court’s decision in United States v.”
Indus. Comm'n v. Arteaga, 735 P.2d 473 (Colo. 1987).
· cites it 6× “The court of appeals concluded that Arteaga was entitled to wage credit from the date he applied for legal permanent residence and obtained work authorization from the INS.”
People v. Clanton, 361 P.3d 1056 (Colo. Ct. App. 2015).
· cites it 5× “It states: As a guide to the interpretation and application of this article, the public policy of this state is declared to be as follows: Economic insecurity due to unemployment is a serious menace to the health, morals, and welfare of the people of this state.”
Technical Comput. Servs., Inc. v. Buckley, 844 P.2d 1249 (Colo. Ct. App. 1992).
· cites it 3× “Involuntary unemployment is therefore a subject of general interest and concern which requires appropriate action by the general assembly to prevent its spread and to lighten its burden which now so often falls with crushing force upon the unemployed worker and his family.”
In Re Adamic, 291 B.R. 175 (Bankr.D. Colo. 2003).
· cites it 2× “Colo.Rev.Stat. § 8-70-102. In determining whether a governmental unit’s actions fall within the parameters of § 362(b)(4), however, the Court must consider the “pecuniary purpose” test and the “public policy” test.”
Olsgard v. Indus. Comm'n, 548 P.2d 910 (Colo. 1976).
· cites it 3× “2 Now section 8-70-102, C.R.S. 1973. 3 Now section 8-73-108(6), C.”
Salida Sch. Dist. R-32-J v. Morrison, 732 P.2d 1160 (Colo. 1987).
“4 The remedies available and procedures followed in a section 1983 action are materially different from the remedies and procedures available in an unemployment compensation proceeding, the issues presented are not identical, and the employer has little incentive to defend a…”
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.