Colorado § 24-34-602 - Penalty and civil liability.

§ 24-34-602. Penalty and civil liability.

(1) (a) A person aggrieved by the violation of section 24-34-601, 24-34-802 (1)(b), or 24-34-803 may bring an action in any court of competent jurisdiction. Upon finding a violation of section 24-34-601, 24-34-802 (1)(b), or 24-34-803, the plaintiff is entitled to a court order requiring compliance with the provisions of the applicable section, attorney fees and costs, and either:

(I) Recovery of actual monetary damages and, except as otherwise provided in subsection (1)(c) of this section, damages for noneconomic loss or injury, as defined in section 13-21-102.5 (2)(b); or

(II) A statutory fine of five thousand dollars, payable to each plaintiff for each violation.

(b) (Deleted by amendment, L. 2025).

(c) (I) Recovery of damages for noneconomic loss or injury in accordance with subsection (1)(a)(I) of this section is limited to an amount not to exceed fifty thousand dollars.

(II) (A) A defendant is entitled to a fifty-percent reduction of the statutory cap set forth in subsection (1)(c)(I) of this section on noneconomic loss or injury damages awarded in accordance with subsection (1)(a)(I) of this section if the defendant corrects the violation within thirty days after the complaint is filed; except that a defendant that knowingly, intentionally, or recklessly made or caused to be made the violation is not entitled to a reduction pursuant to this subsection (1)(c)(II).

(B) Notwithstanding the period set forth in subsection (1)(c)(II)(A) of this section, a defendant that is not able to fully correct the violation within the thirty-day period set forth in subsection (1)(c)(II)(A) of this section may be allowed additional time in thirty-day increments not to exceed a total of one hundred twenty days, including the initial thirty-day period set forth in subsection (1)(c)(II)(A) of this section, if the defendant shows good faith effort to correct the violation. If the defendant has not fully corrected the violation within one hundred twenty days, the defendant is not entitled to the reduction set forth in subsection (1)(c)(II)(A) of this section.

(III) Nothing in this subsection (1)(c) reduces actual monetary damages awarded in accordance with subsection (1)(a)(I) of this section.

(1.5) (a) A person aggrieved by a violation of section 1-1-116 may bring an action in any court of competent jurisdiction. Upon finding a violation of section 1-1-116, the plaintiff is entitled to a court order requiring compliance with the provisions of the applicable section and either:

(I) The recovery of actual monetary damages; or

(II) A statutory fine of three thousand five hundred dollars, payable to each plaintiff for each violation.

(b) For a claim brought for a violation of section 1-1-116, each caucus or assembly is considered a single incident and not as separate violations.

(2) Repealed.

(3) The relief provided by this section is an alternative to that authorized by section 24-34-306 (9), and a person who seeks redress under this section is not permitted to seek relief from the commission.

(4) For any suit brought pursuant to this section that relates to discrimination on the basis of disability, the court shall apply the same standards and defenses that are available under the federal "Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990", 42 U.S.C. sec. 12101 et seq., and its related amendments and implementing regulations.

Source: L. 79: Entire part R&RE, p. 937, § 3, effective July 1. L. 93: Entire section amended, p. 1662, § 66, effective July 1. L. 2008: Entire section amended, p. 1597, § 7, effective May 29. L. 2009: (1) and (2) amended, (SB 09-110), ch. 238, p. 1086, § 8, effective July 1. L. 2013: (2) repealed and (3) amended, (SB 13-184), ch. 127, p. 426, § 1, effective April 19. L. 2014: (1) amended, (SB 14-118), ch. 250, p. 979, § 8, effective August 6. L. 2024: (1)(a) amended, (HB 24-1124), ch. 224, p. 1394, § 2, effective August 7. L. 2025: (1) amended and (4) added, (HB 25-1239), ch. 232, p. 1099, § 3, effective August 6. L. 2026: (1.5) added, (HB 26-1023), ch. 73, p. 289, § 2, effective April 27.

Cross references: For the legislative declaration contained in the 2008 act amending this section, see section 1 of chapter 341, Session Laws of Colorado 2008. For the legislative declaration in HB 25-1239, see section 1 of chapter 232, Session Laws of Colorado 2025.

ANNOTATION

Law reviews. For comment on Crosswaith v. Bergin appearing below, see 7 Rocky Mt. L. Rev. 78 (1934). For comment on Crosswaith v. Thomason appearing below, see 7 Rocky Mt. L. Rev. 78 (1934).

Section is constitutional. Crosswaith v. Bergin, 95 Colo. 241, 35 P.2d 848 (1934).

Section must be strictly construed. Considering the penal character of this section, the rule of strict construction must be applied. Darius v. Apostolos, 68 Colo. 323, 190 P. 150 (1920).

No proof of pecuniary damage is necessary in an action under this and the preceding section for the refusal to serve a person because of his race in a restaurant. Crosswaith v. Bergin, 95 Colo. 241, 35 P.2d 848 (1934).

Burden on proprietor to show employee's discriminatory action not within scope of authority. Where a cashier refuses to serve a person on account of his color, the burden is on the proprietor to show that the refusal is not committed in the course of the proprietor's business or that it is not within the scope of the cashier's authority. Crosswaith v. Thomason, 95 Colo. 240, 35 P.2d 849 (1934).

Defendant's offer to pay, or deposit, $500.01 did not moot plaintiff's claim. Whether an offer of tender can be considered payment for penalty must be determined on a case-by-case basis. Scardina v. Masterpiece Cakeshop, Inc., 2023 COA 8, 528 P.3d 926, vacated, 2024 CO 67, 556 P.3d 1238 (decided under former law).