Cases that meet one or more of the following criteria will be summarized as Cases of Note.
- The General Assembly is a named party.
- The decision is based on separation of powers.
- The decision interprets a constitutional provision that applies specifically to the General Assembly.
- The decision clearly overrules precedent.
- The decision explicitly creates a conflict within the court of appeals.
- The court finds that a statute is unconstitutional.
- The court finds that federal law preempts a statute or constitutional provision.
- The court finds that a statute conflicts with other statutes.
- The court finds that a statute is so ambiguous that it suggests that the General Assembly amend it.
- The court finds that a statute has a gap or otherwise is broken so that it cannot apply the statute without significant interpretation.
- The decision reverses the trial court or court of appeals on a significant question of law.
- The decision appears to be a landmark decision for Colorado.
- The court significantly reinterprets a statute or constitutional provision.
- The subject matter is of significant policy interest.