Court Opinion

ID: 9754773
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-28 20:13:15.668797+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:27:57.579350
License: Public Domain

*647Judge TERRY
specially concurring.
I concur in the majority's result and reasoning. I write separately to address the requirements for certification and acceptance of an interlocutory appeal in a civil case under Colorado's new civil interlocutory appeal rule.
Under CAR. 4.2(b)(1)-(2), three prongs must be met before a trial court may certify, and the court of appeals may accept, interlocutory review of an order in a civil case:
(1) Immediate review of the order may promote a more orderly disposition or establish a final disposition of the litigation; and
(2) the order involves a controlling question of law; and
(3) the controlling question of law is also an unresolved question of law.
CAR. see 102.1(1)(a)-(b), C.R.S.2011. also § 13-4-
The majority's opinion addresses only the second and third of these requirements, namely, whether the trial court's order involves a controlling question of law and whether that question is unresolved. The fact that any one of these prongs cannot be satisfied here justifies denial of the petition, without regard to whether the others can be met.
Trial courts considering certification of orders under C.A.R. 4.2 should be cognizant of each of these three prongs, and should specifically address each of them in any order granting certification. Future petitioners should also separately address each prong in their petitions.