Responsibilities of W.F-L
433 P.3d 168
Colo. Ct. App.2018Background
- Parents never married; one child born 2004. Georgia entered a final order in 2011 and modified parenting plan in 2012. Mother and child moved to Colorado in 2014.
- In 2016 father (Lee) petitioned to register the 2012 Georgia parenting plan in Colorado; mother (Flagge) argued both the 2011 and 2012 Georgia orders needed registration and co-petitioned.
- Father filed a verified motion under Colo. Rev. Stat. § 14-10-129.5 alleging mother denied his parenting time and requesting remedies (make-up time, parental education, bond, attorney fees).
- At the final orders hearing the district court registered the Georgia orders and adopted stipulated future parenting time, but denied father’s § 14-10-129.5 enforcement motion, concluding it lacked subject matter jurisdiction to enforce events that occurred before registration.
- Father appealed the denial; the Court of Appeals reversed, holding Colorado courts may register an out-of-state parenting determination and simultaneously consider enforcement remedies (including backward-looking remedies) under § 14-10-129.5.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a Colorado court has subject-matter jurisdiction under the UCCJEA to enforce a Georgia parenting-time order upon registration, including remedies under § 14-10-129.5 | Lee: Registration may be with or without a simultaneous enforcement request; once registered the court may grant any Colorado enforcement relief, including § 14-10-129.5 remedies. | Flagge: Court lacked jurisdiction to enforce parenting-time violations that occurred before registration; enforcement was premature and not allowed absent emergency procedures. | The court held Colorado may register the Georgia orders and simultaneously consider enforcement; § 14-13-306(1) permits granting Colorado enforcement remedies (including § 14-10-129.5). |
| Whether the appeal is moot because the court adopted stipulations modifying parenting time | Lee: Remedies requested under § 14-10-129.5 (make-up time, bond, education, fees) remain live and are not superseded by the modification. | Flagge: Adoption of stipulations mooted the enforcement request; any alternative tort claim would be time-barred. | The court held the appeal was not moot; modification did not foreclose additional remedies under § 14-10-129.5. |
Key Cases Cited
- Brandt v. Brandt, 268 P.3d 406 (Colo. 2012) (standard of review and UCCJEA jurisdiction principles)
- In re Marriage of Dedie, 255 P.3d 1142 (Colo. 2011) (Colorado courts’ duty to enforce out-of-state parental-responsibility orders under the UCCJEA)
- In re Marriage of Salby, 126 P.3d 291 (Colo. App. 2005) (discussion of mootness in parenting-time appeals)