Cases that meet one or more of the following criteria will be summarized as Cases of Note. Objective 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. Subjective 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.
