Not a CBA Member? Join Now!
Find A Lawyer Directory
Legal Directory

TCL > November 1999 Issue > Court Business

November 1999       Vol. 28, No. 11       Page  119
From the Courts
Court Business

Court Business

U.S. Bankruptcy Court
District of Colorado

Notice of Amendments
To the Local Bankruptcy Rules

The Judges of the Bankruptcy Court, after giving public notice and an opportunity for comment pursuant to Rule 83, Fed.R.Civ.P., have promulgated amendments to the Local Bankruptcy Rules and Forms. The text of the proposed amendments affects Local Bankruptcy Rules 102, 109, 117, 202, 401, and 910, and Local Bankruptcy Forms 202.1, 202.2, 202.3, 203, 304, 401.3, and the Appendix. Implementation of a proposed amendment to Local Bankruptcy Rule 214 is deferred pending further consideration and coordination with the practitioners.

The amendments become effective December 1, 1999.

A copy of the amendments may be picked up free of charge from the Clerk of the Bankruptcy Court or by mailing a self-addressed, postage pre-paid ($.55) envelope to: Attn. Amendments to the Local Bankruptcy Rules, U.S. Bankruptcy Court, District of Colorado, 721 19th St., First Fl., Denver, CO 80202-2508. The amendments are also available at the Court’s website:

For the Court:
Bradford L. Bolton, Clerk

In the Matter Notices Mailed by the Clerk
Or Other Entities Using Official Funds
Of the United States Courts on Behalf of
Trustees Assigned to Administer Bankruptcy Cases


THIS MATTER arises sua sponte upon the need for the Court to revise its noticing policies and procedures to require that the burden and expense of mailing notices in bankruptcy cases and proceedings be borne by litigants, including trustees, rather than taxpayers, as a fiscally sound practice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 156 and in accordance with Revised Noticing Guidelines approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in March 1999. Accordingly, it is

ORDERED that effective January 1, 2000, the Clerk shall cease mailing, via the Bankruptcy Noticing Contractor (BNC) or otherwise, the following notices on behalf of trustees:

(1) Notice Pursuant to LBR 202 of Trustee’s Intent to Abandon;
(2) Notice Pursuant to 6007(a) of Trustee’s Intent to Abandon;
(3) Notice Pursuant to FedRBP 9019 and LBR 202 of Trustee’s Motion to Approve Compromise and Settlement.

Dated: September 20, 1999.

By the Court:
Charles E. Matheson, Chief Judge
Sidney B. Brooks, Judge
Patricia Ann Clark, Judge
Donald E. Cordova, Judge
Roland J. Brumbaugh, Judge
Marcia S. Krieger, Judge

Colorado Judicial Department
Chief Justice of the Supreme Court Directives

Notice of Availability

A full set of the Chief Justice Directives may be purchased from the Colorado Judicial Department for $15, which includes copying, handling, and postage costs. Checks should be made payable to Colorado Judicial Department and should be mailed to: Court Services Division, Office of the State Court Administrator, 1301 Pennsylvania St., #300, Denver, CO 80203. Individual Chief Justice Directives will be assessed a $5 charge, pursuant to Chief Justice Directive 96-01, concerning standard research fees. Chief Justice Directives also are available from the Colorado Supreme Court homepage at:

Publication in The Colorado Lawyer

Chief Justice Directives will be published on a space available basis in this “Court Business” section of The Colorado Lawyer. Some attachments may be omitted. To obtain a copy of attachments, contact the Court Services Division, Office of the State Court Administrator, 1301 Pennsylvania St., #300, Denver, CO 80203.


Supreme Court of Colorado
Office of the Chief Justice
Concerning Uniform and Simplified Forms
For Family Court Matters

A broad multi-discliplinary committee, which included members of the bar, judicial officers, clerks, domestic case managers and users has worked for over the past three years to produce a new standard form set for use in domestic relations matters. As part of the process, family court forms and form sets from the major district courts throughout the state were collected. The best forms from each jurisdiction, such as petitions, orders, financial affidavits, and motions were reviewed, new forms were created, and the results were combined into the standard form set which is now being promulgated for use throughout the Colorado court system.

The family court forms listed on the attached index, and others which may supplement this set, are approved in principle for use in all Colorado state courts. They have not been tested in an adversarial proceeding. These forms are being made available on a computer disk in PDF format to each clerk of court, so that courts may print and produce their own blank forms locally, if they choose to do so. To print these forms locally, Adobe/Acrobat Reader must be installed on a PC. This software is being provided to each clerk. Because of the edited field feature of these forms, information may also be entered to the forms on the PC and printed. These forms will also be available via the internet on the Colorado Courts Home Page at (

On the Internet, these forms are in PDF format and have also been edited so that individuals may fill out the forms on-line and print a completed form. Adobe/Acrobat Reader software is needed to use the edited version of these forms on-line, as well as to print blank forms. This software may be downloaded directly from the Colorado Courts Home Page. These forms may also be downloaded, produced and sold to members of the public and the courts by any private vendor. Members of the bar may download these forms to their computers and use as appropriate. PDF format prevents changes to the content and format of these forms. Only the edited fields of each form, such as names, addresses, dates and ages may be completed.

All forms carry a Judicial Department Form (JDF) number and an effective date of 1/99. The forms meet current statutory requirements and should be accurate as of the effective date. The forms are both instructional and substantive. In many instances, the substantive forms are accompanied by generic instructions. Courts may use the generic instructions as presented, revise the instructions, or create new local instructions. Courts may also pre-set the headers and signature blocks of the substantive forms with the name of the court and the name of the clerk.

Other than these exceptions, the substance and format of the forms are not to be changed until amendments are adopted by the Office of the State Court Administrator. Forms may be added or deleted from this set as changes occur. When revisions are made, each form will carry a new revision date. All suggested revisions to these forms should be addressed to the Office of the State Court Administrator, Attention: Court Services Division. A standing sub-committee of the multi-disciplinary committee or others will review all requests for changes, additions and deletions and make any legislative or other changes as necessary. All changes or amendments will be posted on the Internet at the Colorado Courts Home Page. A new computer disk reflecting revisions may also be made available when appropriate.

These forms are effective January 11, 1999 and must be accepted by all courts after this date. This directive does not preclude the use of different forms covering the same subject matter.


Chief Justice Mary J. Mullarkey

January 11, 1999


Supreme Court of Colorado
Office of the Chief Justice
Coding Procedures Relating to Public Safety, Resource Utilization, and Management

The following policies are intended to make the entry of critical data into the Judicial Branch’s automated information system, “ICON”, accurate and consistent in all judicial districts. It is the responsibility of chief judges, district administrators and chief probation officers to make sure that the standards and practices set forth in this directive are implemented in their respective districts.

The accurate entry of certain data, including the use of proper codes, into ICON, is essential to achieve the following three important purposes:

a. Protecting the public;
b. Requesting and allocating FTE for courts and probation departments; and,
c. Tracking and managing caseloads.

This directive is divided into four sections. The first section specifies the coding procedures that the various courts and probation departments must use. These are essential to achieving the purposes set forth above. The second section specifies the assessment process that the State Court Administrator’s Office is to use in order to evaluate each district’s adherence to these procedures. The third section requires the State Court Administrator to adopt administrative procedures assuring implementation of these procedures. This includes the authority to consider compliance with these procedures when allocating judicial resources including positions, personal services and operating funds. The fourth section establishes a notification procedure to allow courts and probation departments to correct improper coding procedures in a timely and effective fashion.

1. Critical codes and data entry procedures.

Among the hundreds of codes and data entry procedures utilized within ICON there are those codes and procedures critical for achieving the purposes set forth above. This CJD addresses only those codes and data entry procedures that are critical for achieving the purposes set forth above. (It is significant to note that there are hundreds of other codes and procedures in ICON that are extremely important to the operations of the Judicial Branch. The exclusion of those other codes and procedures from the subject matter of this CJD should not be construed to diminish in any way their importance.) The following areas listed below have such importance that particular attention must be paid to those “critical tasks” identified by the State Court Administrator in the Public Safety, Resource Utilization and Management: Critical Coding Procedures. That document is to be updated annually by the State Court Administrator’s Office.

  • Warrants
  • Restraining Orders
  • Fingerprints
  • Management Reports
    • Open Case Report
    • Statistics Report
    • Statistical Verification Report
    • Case Activity Report
    • Age of Case Reports
    • Civil Case Tracking Report
    • Criminal Activity Report
    • Dependency and Neglect Report
    • Open Warrant Report
  • Probation Reports
    • Monthly Statistical Reports
    • Service Referral Report
  • Probation Information
    • Probation Triggers
    • Assessment/classification
    • Terminations

It is the responsibility of the State Court Administrator’s Office to maintain the Public Safety, Resource Utilization and Management: Critical Coding Procedures, The Trial Court Statistical Definition & Coding Manual and the Probation Statistical Coding Manual. The State Court Administrator shall establish a process for answering questions from the districts regarding the proper use of codes. This includes proper filing practices and other business issues relating to the use of codes.

2. Assessment of coding practices

The State Court Administrator will assess how well districts are complying with the standard coding procedures through trial court operation reviews, probation program reviews or other assessment procedures. The State Court Administrator will provide courts and probation departments with assistance to bring local coding practices in-line with state standards. The State Court Administrator should include representatives from the courts and probation when the coding practices are assessed.

3. Implementation of coding procedures

The State Court Administrator shall adopt administrative procedures that will assure implementation of these procedures. This includes the authority to consider compliance with these procedures when allocating judicial resources. The State Court Administrator shall form a committee comprised of representatives from the following administrative standing committees: Planning & Analysis, IIS, Court Services, and the Probation Advisory Committee. This committee will from time to time recommend critical coding procedures relating to public safety, resource utilization, and management to be used statewide, review the results of the various assessments and make recommendations to assure the use of such standards in the courts and probation. Such recommendations may include factoring coding variations into the allocation process, training, assessment techniques, and other suggestions that will further the implementation of standard coding procedures.

4. Notification

So that districts will have the opportunity to correct improper coding practices promptly, the State Court Administrator shall establish a procedure to notify courts and probation departments of the proper coding procedures, the results of the assessment and the impact such practices may have on the allocation of resources.

Done this 28th day of January, 1999.

Chief Justice Mary J. Mullarkey

© 1999 The Colorado Lawyer and Colorado Bar Association. All Rights Reserved. Material from The Colorado Lawyer provided via this World Wide Web server is protected by the copyright laws of the United States and may not be reproduced in any way or medium without permission. This material also is subject to the disclaimers at