Colorado § 31-10-1401 - Controversies.

§ 31-10-1401. Controversies.

(1) When any controversy arises between any official charged with any duty or function under this article and any candidate or other person, the district court, upon the filing of a verified petition by any such official or person setting forth in concise form the nature of the controversy and the relief sought, shall issue an order commanding the respondent in such petition to appear before the court and answer under oath to such petition. It is the duty of the court to summarily hear and dispose of any such issues, with a view to obtaining a substantial compliance with the provisions of this article by the parties to such controversy, and to make and enter orders and judgments and to follow the procedures of such court to enforce all such orders and judgments.

(2) Such proceedings may be reviewed and finally adjudicated by the supreme court of this state if application to such court is made within five days after the termination thereof by the court in which the petition was filed and if the supreme court is willing to assume jurisdiction of the case.

Source: L. 75: Entire title R&RE, p. 1068, § 1, effective July 1.

Editor's note: This section is similar to former § 31-10-1201 as it existed prior to 1975.

ANNOTATION

Annotator's note. Since § 31-10-1401 is similar to former § 31-10-1201 prior to the 1975 repeal and reenactment of this title, and laws antecedent thereto, relevant cases construing a prior provision have been included in the annotations to this section.

There is no ambiguity in the explicit language of the statute which names the district court as the forum in which such petitions are to filed. Birkenmayer v. Carter, 165 Colo. 459, 439 P.2d 991 (1968).

Jurisdiction continues past election. Because the municipal election was 20 days ago and persons elected on that date are now in office, it appears that no remedy is afforded the petitioner whose name was omitted from the ballot in connection with the election; nevertheless, the district court erred in dismissing the action of the ground that it had no jurisdiction of the present controversy. Birkenmayer v. Carter, 165 Colo. 459, 439 P.2d 991 (1968).

Applied in Theobald v. Byrns, 195 Colo. 330, 579 P.2d 609 (1978).