Any additional proceedings brought by HMS to enforce the Order were purely ministerial and did not invoke the decisionmaking powers of the Court. Colo. R. Civ. The Estate contends that by considering the constitutionality of Sec. An order entered nunc pro tunc takes effect on the date the order was originally made, not the date entered. After an unfavorable decision before the Division and the United States District Court, appellant sought relief with the Court of Appeals, arguing the Division denied him Due Process as provided by the Fourteenth Amendment.
Legal issues arising from the facts are the litigant's responsibility.
Once HMS served the Estate with notice it would challenge the Estate's disallowance of its claim, the Estate received all the notice required. The Estate's command of legal issues surrounding the validity of the claim, such as the meaning of Sec. 803, its applicability to the case, HMS's right to act on behalf of DSS, other statutes that might impact the case, and the constitutionality of Sec. 803 was then, and fairly, its responsibility. The Court will not hear the Estate to complain the Magistrate and the other party failed to donate legal analysis.