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

Colo. Rev. Stat. § 8-70-108 (2024)

Conformity with federal statutes

✓ C.R.S. 2024: the 2025 and 2026 sessions are not included
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CO-LEGleg.colorado.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

If any provisions contained in articles 70 to 82 of this title are determined to be in nonconformity with federal statutes, as determined by the United States secretary of labor or an assistant secretary of labor, the division, with the concurrence of the attorney general of the state of Colorado, is authorized to administer said articles so as to conform with the provisions of the federal statutes until such time as the general assembly meets in its next regular session and has an opportunity to amend said articles.

Source: L. 77: Entire section added, p. 463, § 13, effective July 7. L. 81: Entire section amended, p. 482, § 2, effective July 1. L. 94: Entire section amended, p. 1627, § 19, effective May 31.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9 cases, 1982–2015 · leading case: Indus. Com'n v. Adams Cty. Bd. of Cty. Com'rs, 690 P.2d 839 (Colo. 1984).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Indus. Com'n v. Adams Cty. Bd. of Cty. Com'rs, 690 P.2d 839 (Colo. 1984). · cites it 9× “13, § 8-70-108, 1977 Colo.Sess. Laws 463. On July 17, 1980, the United States Department of Labor notified the state employment division that the court of appeals' interpretation of the Colorado Employment Security Act in Martinez , excluding Headstart workers employed by…”
Indus. Comm'n v. Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners, 690 P.2d 839 (Colo. 1984). · cites it 9× “13, § 8-70-108, 1977 Colo.Sess. Laws 463. On July 17, 1980, the United States Department of Labor notified the state employment division that the court of appeals’ interpretation of the Colorado Employment Security Act in Martinez , excluding Head-start workers employed by…”
Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners v. Indus. Comm'n, 650 P.2d 1297 (Colo. Ct. App. 1982). · cites it 3× “’ ” Since prior to the rulings at issue here, there was no expressed intent by the General Assembly to overrule our holding in Martinez , and since the General Assembly has no power to delegate such legislative power to the Industrial Commission, even if such intent had been…”
Indus. Claim Appeals Off. v. Colorado Dep't of Labor & Emp., 2013 CO 52, 307 P.3d 1093. · cites it 2× “§ 8-70-108(2), C.R.S. (2012). The base period is the period used to determine eligibility for unemployment benefits.”
Found. for Human Enrichment v. Indus. Claim Appeals Off., 2013 COA 175, 339 P.3d 1046. “T 16 The CESA contains two statutes that address whether an individual's services are covered employment and the Division's respective authority to impose unemployment compensation taxes.”
Hopkins v. Indus. Claim Appeals Off., 310 P.3d 147 (Colo. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 3× “" § 8-70-108(2), C.R.S.2011. "Employer" is defined to include "[alny employing unit that .”
Getts v. Indus. Claim Appeals Off., 804 P.2d 282 (Colo. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 2× “1989) (evidence insufficient to demonstrate that non-exempted insurance agents are similar to real estate agents exempted from act by § 8-70-108(ll)(i), C.R.S. (1986 Repl.Vol.”
Black Sheep, Inc. v. State, Div. of Emp. & Training, 804 P.2d 871 (Colo. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 4× “§§ 3121 (c), 3306(d), and 3402(e), because incorporation of these federal statutes is necessary to keep the Colorado Employment Security Act, § 8-70-101, et seq., C.R.S. (1986 Repl.Vol. 3B) (Colorado Act) in conformity with the Federal Unemployment Tax Act, 26 U.”
Whitewater Hill, LlLC v. Indus. Claim Appeals Off. of State of Colorado, 2014 COA 5, 345 P.3d 984. · cites it 2× “See § 8-70-108, C.R.S. 2014 (providing that if any provisions of CESA "are determined to be in nonconformity with federal statutes," the Division of Unemployment Insurance "is authorized to administer said articles so as to conform with the provisions of the federal statutes");…”
Colo. Rev. Stat. § 8-70-108(11): 1 case
Found. for Human Enrichment v. Indus. Claim Appeals Off., 2013 COA 175, 339 P.3d 1046. “T 16 The CESA contains two statutes that address whether an individual's services are covered employment and the Division's respective authority to impose unemployment compensation taxes.”
Colo. Rev. Stat. § 8-70-108(2): 2 cases
Indus. Claim Appeals Off. v. Colorado Dep't of Labor & Emp., 2013 CO 52, 307 P.3d 1093. “§ 8-70-108(2), C.R.S. (2012). The base period is the period used to determine eligibility for unemployment benefits.”
Hopkins v. Indus. Claim Appeals Off., 310 P.3d 147 (Colo. Ct. App. 2011). “" § 8-70-108(2), C.R.S.2011. "Employer" is defined to include "[alny employing unit that .”
Colo. Rev. Stat. § 8-70-108(9): 1 case
Hopkins v. Indus. Claim Appeals Off., 310 P.3d 147 (Colo. Ct. App. 2011). “" § 8-70-108(2), C.R.S.2011. "Employer" is defined to include "[alny employing unit that .”
Colo. Rev. Stat. § 8-70-108(ll)(i): 1 case
Getts v. Indus. Claim Appeals Off., 804 P.2d 282 (Colo. Ct. App. 1990). “1989) (evidence insufficient to demonstrate that non-exempted insurance agents are similar to real estate agents exempted from act by § 8-70-108(ll)(i), C.R.S. (1986 Repl.Vol.”
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.