CO Code § 13-9-103 (2021)
2021 Colorado Code|Title 13 - Courts and Court Procedure|Article 9 - Probate Court of Denver|§ 13-9-103. Jurisdiction

  The probate court of the city and county of Denver has original and exclusive jurisdiction in said city and county of:   The administration, settlement, and distribution of estates of decedents, wards, and absentees;    Property vested in any person under a legal disability but paid to or held by another for such person's use or benefit as authorized by court order or as authorized by a power contained in a will or trust instrument;    Property vested in any minor pursuant to the “Colorado Uniform Transfers to Minors Act”, or any predecessor act thereto, or any act having a substantially similar legal effect;    The probate of wills;    The granting of letters testamentary, of administration, of guardianship, and of conservatorship;    The administration of guardianships of minors and of persons declared mentally incompetent and of conservatorships of persons with mental health disorders or persons with an intellectual and developmental disability and of absentees;    Proceedings under article 23 of title 17 and articles 10 to 15 of title 27, C.R.S.;    The determination of heirship in probate proceedings and the devolution of title to property in probate proceedings;    Actions on the official bonds of fiduciaries appointed by it;    The construction of wills;    The administration of testamentary trusts, except as provided in subsection (2) of this section; and    All other probate matters.       If a testamentary trust is established by the will of the decedent and if it appears that it was not the intention of the testator that the court should continue the administration of the estate after the payment in full of all debts and legacies except the trust property, the court shall proceed to final settlement of such estate as in other cases, order the trust fund or property to be turned over to the trustee as such, and shall not require the filing of inventories and accounts, or supervise the administration of the trust; except that any party in interest of such trust, including the trustee thereof, may invoke the jurisdiction of the probate court with respect to any matters pertaining to the administration or distribution of such trust or to construe the will under which it was established.    The court has jurisdiction to determine every legal and equitable question arising in connection with decedents', wards', and absentees' estates, so far as the question concerns any person who is before the court by reason of any asserted right in any of the property of the estate or by reason of any asserted obligation to the estate, including, without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the jurisdiction:   To give full and complete legal and equitable relief in any case in which it is alleged that the decedent breached an agreement to make or not to make a will;    In any case in which a district court could grant such relief in a separate action brought therein, to impose or raise a trust with respect to any of the property of the decedent or any property in the name of the decedent, individually or in any other capacity, in any case in which the demand for such relief arises in connection with the administration of the estate of a decedent;    To partition any of the real or personal property of any estate in connection with the settlement thereof.       Nothing in this article shall prevent any district court sitting in law or equity from construing a will which is not before the probate court or from determining questions arising in connection with trusts which are not under the jurisdiction of the probate court.    The court has jurisdiction to determine every legal and equitable question arising out of or in connection with express trusts.    The provisions of articles 10 to 20 of title 15, article 23 of title 17, and articles 10 to 15 of title 27, C.R.S., shall govern the issuance and service and proof of service of any process, notice, citation, writ, or order of court and shall govern all other proceedings had pursuant to the powers of the court recited in subsections (1) and (2) of this section. The Colorado rules of civil procedure shall govern such matters when the proceedings are had pursuant to the powers granted to the court under any of the other provisions of this section.    With respect to any trust established by or for an individual with his or her assets, income, or property of any kind, notwithstanding any statutory provision to the contrary, the court shall not authorize, direct, or ratify any trust that either has the effect of qualifying or purports to qualify the trust beneficiary for federal supplemental security income, or public or medical assistance pursuant to title 26, C.R.S., unless the trust meets the criteria set forth in sections 15-14-412.6 to 15-14-412.9, C.R.S., and any rule adopted by the medical services board pursuant to section 25.5-6-103, C.R.S.     History. Source: L. 64: P. 445, § 3. L. 65: Pp. 483, 484, §§ 1, 2. C.R.S. 1963: § 37-20-3 . L. 67: P. 103, § 1. L. 79: (1)(g) and (6) amended, p. 1634, § 22, effective July 19. L. 84: (1)(c) amended, p. 394, § 4, effective July 1. L. 94: (7) added, p. 1604, § 13, effective July 1. L. 2000: (7) amended, p. 1832, § 3, effective January 1, 2001. L. 2006: (7) amended, p. 2001, § 46, effective July 1; (1)(f) amended, p. 1395, § 35, effective August 7. L. 2017: (1)(f) amended,(HB 17-1046), ch. 50, p. 156, § 3, effective March 16; (1)(f) amended,(SB 17-242), ch. 263, p. 1292, § 106, effective May 25.    Cross references:    For the “Colorado Uniform Transfers to Minors Act”, see article 50 of title 11.    For the legislative declaration in SB 17-242, see section 1 of chapter 263, Session Laws of Colorado 2017.     ANNOTATION   Law reviews. For article, “Civil Commitment of the Mentally Ill in the Denver Probate Court”, see 46 Den. L.J. 496 (1969). For article, “Will Contests -- Some Procedural Aspects”, see 15 Colo. Law. 787 (1986). For article, “Probate Jurisdiction for Creditors' Claims”, see 29 Colo. Law. 57 (May 2000). For article, “Sitting Pretty in Probate: What Sandstead Means for Probate Jurisdiction”, see 48 Colo. Law. 50 (Jan. 2019).   Specific enumeration of court's subject-matter jurisdiction is applicable to all district courts sitting in probate matters since all probate courts may exercise subject-matter jurisdiction vested by this title. Lembach v. Lembach, 622 P.2d 606 (Colo. App. 1980).   In determining proper jurisdiction as between district court and probate court, the court must look at the facts alleged, the claims asserted, and the relief requested. Here, where the complaints were premised upon defendant's alleged legal malpractice in the drafting of the estate instruments, the estate planning, and the implementation of the estate plan, the complaints were not considered probate claims, and, therefore, jurisdiction lay with the district court not the probate court. Levine v. Katz, 192 P.3d 1008 (Colo. App. 2006).   Probate court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over claims of legal malpractice where plaintiff does not seek to recover assets of the estate. Levine v. Katz, 167 P.3d 141 (Colo. App. 2006).   The phrase “in connection with” in subsection (3)(a) is a grant of authority to resolve disputes logically relating to an estate. This grant of jurisdiction presupposes, by necessary implication, the possibility that a person may have a valid claim to property claimed by an estate, and therefore contemplates that such property, while claimed by the estate, does not belong to the estate. In re Estate of Murphy, 195 P.3d 1147 (Colo. App. 2008); In Interest of Black, 2018 COA 7 , 422 P.3d 592.   In evaluating the child's best interests, the probate court did not exceed its jurisdiction by directing the GAL to find a permanent guardian or by considering the potential for a future adoption. Nothing in this section deprives the district court of the authority to appoint a guardian for a child. In re J.C.T., 176 P.3d 726 (Colo. 2007).   When extrinsic fraud is shown to exist, a judgment may be collaterally attacked, for such fraud renders the judgment not merely irregular, but void. As such, the judgment has neither life nor incipience and as a nullity it may be attacked directly or collaterally at any time. In re Estate of Bonfils, 190 Colo. 70 , 543 P.2d 701 (1975).   Intrinsic frauds, however, cannot give rise to collateral attack, though they may create voidable judgments, be the basis of a successful direct appeal, or be the subject of a motion for relief from judgment. In re Estate of Bonfils, 190 Colo. 70 , 543 P.2d 701 (1975).   Probate court had jurisdiction to order cancellation of bonds and release of security held by trustee pursuant to municipal revenue bond trust indenture. Petition of First Interstate Bank, 767 P.2d 792 (Colo. App. 1988).   Trial court sitting in probate had jurisdiction under subsection (3)(b) to resolve dispute because the dispute presented a question as to whether multiple-party account funds that one daughter moved to another bank account that her sister could not access were part of mother's probate estate. Sandstead-Corona v. Sandstead, 2018 CO 26, 415 P.3d 310.   The probate court has the authority, in the appropriate circumstances, to instruct trustee to act or not act to carry out the court's goal in the administration of such trust without relying on C.R.C.P. 65. When a trustee's administration of a trust is challenged, the probate court has the authority to issue an injunction against the trustee without establishing grounds for a preliminary injunction to prevent further depletion of the trust while proper distribution of the trust is determined. In re Estate of Scott, 77 P.3d 906 (Colo. App. 2003).