People in Interest of R.S, 2018 CO 31

Arapahoe County DHS filed a dependency/neglect petition naming both parents based on allegations that Father sexually abused his stepdaughter; no outcry or abuse was alleged as to the minor R.S.
Mother demanded a bench trial; Father demanded a jury trial; the court held a single adjudicatory proceeding with the judge as factfinder for Mother and a jury as factfinder for Father.
The judge found R.S. dependent/neglected as to Mother (based on Mother’s response and prospective risk), while the jury found insufficient evidence to adjudicate R.S. as dependent/neglected as to Father.
The trial court adjudicated R.S. dependent/neglected (as to Mother), continued jurisdiction, adopted a treatment plan, and entered an order dismissing Father from the petition; DHS appealed the jury verdict/dismissal and was ordered to show cause on finality.
The Colorado Court of Appeals dismissed DHS’s appeal for lack of jurisdiction; the Colorado Supreme Court granted certiorari to decide whether a no-adjudication dismissal is a final, appealable order.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether an order dismissing one parent after a jury "no-adjudication" verdict is a final, appealable order under §19-1-109 and §13-4-102	DHS (People) argued §19-1-109(1) authorizes appeal of “any order” that qualifies as a final judgment under §13-4-102, so the dismissal was appealable if final	Respondents and court of appeals argued C.A.R. 3.4 and §19-1-109(2)(b)-(c) limit appealability in dependency cases and a no-adjudication dismissal is not a final appealable order	The Court held §19-1-109(1) authorizes appeals of any order that is a "final judgment" under §13-4-102; the dismissal of Father was not a final judgment because the case continued (adjudication as to Mother), so the court of appeals lacked jurisdiction and dismissal was proper

Trujillo v. Colorado Division of Insurance, 320 P.3d 1208 (Colo. 2014) (statutory-construction principles)
People v. Guatney, 214 P.3d 1049 (Colo. 2009) (definition of final order for appealability)
Cyr v. District Court, 685 P.2d 769 (Colo. 1984) (finality principle: entire case must be decided before appeal)
Lytle v. Kite, 728 P.2d 305 (Colo. 1986) (C.R.C.P. 54(b) certification exception to finality)
Bill Dreiling Motor Co. v. Court of Appeals, 468 P.2d 37 (Colo. 1970) (statutes creating appellate remedies prevail over court rules)
Wiedemer v. People, 852 P.2d 424 (Colo. 1993) (procedural/substantive distinction between rules and statutes)
McKenna v. People, 585 P.2d 275 (Colo. 1978) (same: rule/statute authority interplay)