Colo. R. App. P. 4.2

As amended through Rule Change 2024(7), effective April 4, 2024
Rule 4.2 - Interlocutory Appeals in Civil Cases
(a)Discretionary Interlocutory Appeals. Upon certification by the trial court, or stipulation of all parties, the court of appeals may, in its discretion, allow an interlocutory appeal of an order in a civil action. This rule applies only to cases governed by section 13-4-102.1, C.R.S.
(b) Grounds for Granting Interlocutory Appeal. Grounds for certifying and allowing an interlocutory appeal are:
(1) Where immediate review may promote a more orderly disposition or establish a final disposition of the litigation; and
(2) The order involves a controlling and unresolved question of law. For purposes of this rule, an "unresolved question of law" is a question that has not been resolved by the supreme court or determined in a published decision of the court of appeals, or a question of federal law that has not been resolved by the United States Supreme Court.
(c) Procedure in the Trial Court. The party seeking to appeal must move for certification or submit a stipulation signed by all parties within 14 days after the date of the order to be appealed, stating that the appeal is not being sought for purposes of delay. The trial court may, in its discretion, certify an order as immediately appealable, but if all parties stipulate, the trial court must forthwith certify the order. Denial of a motion for certification is not appealable.
(d) Procedure in the Appellate Court. If the trial court certifies an order for an interlocutory appeal, the party seeking an appeal must file a petition to appeal with the clerk of the court of appeals with an advisory copy served on the clerk of the trial court within 14 days of the date of the trial court's certification.
(1) Docketing of Petition and Fees; Form of Documents. Upon the filing of a petition to appeal, appellant must pay to the clerk of the court of appeals the applicable docket fee. All documents filed under this rule must comply with C.A.R. 32.
(2) Number of Copies to be Filed and Served. An original of any petition or brief shall be filed. One set of supporting documents shall be filed.
(3) Content of Documents and Service.
(A) The petition must contain a caption that complies with C.A.R. 3(d)(1) and C.A.R. 32.
(B) To enable the court to determine whether the petition should be granted, the petition must disclose in sufficient detail the following:
(i) The identities of all parties and their status in the proceeding below;
(ii) The order being appealed;
(iii) The reasons why immediate review may promote a more orderly disposition or establish a final disposition of the litigation and why the order involves a controlling and unresolved question of law;
(iv) The issues presented;
(v) The facts necessary to understand the issues presented;
(vi) Argument and points of authority explaining why the petition to appeal should be granted and why the relief requested should be granted; and
(vii) A list of supporting documents, or an explanation of why supporting documents are not available.
(C) The petition must include the names, addresses, email addresses and telephone and fax numbers, if any, of all parties to the proceeding below; or, if a party is represented by counsel, the attorney's name, address, email address and telephone and fax numbers.
(D) The petition must be served upon each party and the court below.
(4) Supporting Documents. A petition must be accompanied by a separate, indexed set of available supporting documents adequate to permit review. Some or all of the following documents may be necessary:
(A) The order being appealed;
(B) Documents and exhibits submitted in the proceeding below that are necessary for a complete understanding of the issues presented;
(C) A transcript of the proceeding leading to the order below.
(5) No Initial Response to Petition Allowed. Unless requested by the court of appeals, no response to the petition is allowed prior to the court's determination of whether to grant or deny the petition.
(6) Briefs. If the court grants the petition to appeal, the petition to appeal will serve as appellant's opening brief. The appellee must file an answer brief, or a separate notice indicating that no answer brief will be filed, and the appellant may file a reply brief according to a briefing schedule established by the court in its order granting the petition to appeal. The petition and briefs must comply with the limitations on length contained in C.A.R. 28(g).
(7) Oral Argument. Oral argument is governed by C.A.R. 34.
(8) Petition for Rehearing. In all proceedings under this Rule 4.2, where the court of appeals has issued an opinion on the merits of the interlocutory appeal, a petition for rehearing may be filed in accordance with the provisions of C.A.R. 40.
(e)Amicus Briefs. Any amicus curiae may file a brief only by leave of the court after a case number has been assigned. Before the court issues an order granting a petition to appeal, an amicus curiae may tender a brief supporting the appellant, but the court may act on a petition at any time after the petition is filed, including before the submission of an amicus brief. If the court issues an order granting the petition to appeal, an amicus brief supporting the appellant must be filed within seven days after the issuance of the order, or such lesser time as the court may permit for the submission of amicus briefs. An amicus brief supporting an appellee must be tendered by the deadline for the appellee's response, or such lesser time as the court may permit for the submission of amicus briefs. An amicus curiae that does not support either party must file its brief no later than seven days after the issuance of the order granting the petition to appeal, or such lesser time as the court may permit for the submission of amicus briefs. The filing of an amicus brief within the deadlines established by this rule but after the court has acted on a petition is not a ground for reconsideration of denial of a petition. A brief submitted by an amicus curiae must comply with C.A.R. 29(a), (b), (c), (d), (f), and (g).
(f)Stay of Trial Court Proceedings.
(1) The filing of a petition under this rule does not stay any proceeding below or the running of any applicable time limit. If the appellant seeks temporary stay pending the court's determination of whether to grant the petition to appeal, a stay ordinarily must be sought in the first instance from the trial court. If a request for stay below is impracticable or not promptly ruled upon or is denied, the appellant may file a separate motion for temporary stay in the court of appeals supported by accompanying materials justifying the requested stay.
(2) An order granting the petition to appeal by the court of appeals automatically stays all proceedings below until final determination of the interlocutory appeal in the court of appeals unless the court, sua sponte, or upon motion lifts such stay in whole or in part.
(g) Effect of Failure to Seek or Denial of Interlocutory Review. Failure to seek or obtain interlocutory review will not limit the scope of review upon an appeal from entry of the final judgment.
(h) Supreme Court Review. Denial of a petition to appeal is not subject to certiorari review. A decision of the court of appeals on the merits will be subject to certiorari review. No provision of this rule limits the jurisdiction of the supreme court under C.A.R. 21.
(i) All matters in the court of Appeals under this rule will be heard and determined by a special or regular division of three judges as assigned by the Chief Judge.

C.A.R. 4.2

Source: Entire rule added and effective 1/13/2011; (c) and IP(d) amended and adopted December 14, 2011, effective 1/1/2012, for all cases pending on or filed on or after 1/1/2012, pursuant to C.R.C.P. 1(b); entire rule amended and effective 6/23/2014; amended and adopted by the Court, En Banc, March 23, 2023, effective 3/23/2023.

ANNOTATION Law reviews. For article, "Interlocutory Appeals in Civil Cases Under C.A.R. 4.2", see 41 Colo. Law. 67 (April 2012). For article, "Knowing When to Change Trains: The Ins and Outs of Interlocutory Appeals", see 41 Colo. Law. 31 (June 2012). Interlocutory resolution would not promote a more orderly disposition. Where plaintiff petitioned for interlocutory review of district court's order that economic loss rule barred plaintiff's other claims against defendants, immediate review would not have avoided a trial. Therefore, interlocutory resolution of the economic loss question would not promote a more orderly disposition of the litigation. Wahrman v. Golden W. Realty, 313 P.3d 674 (Colo. App. 2011). Trial court cannot certify sua sponte an issue for interlocutory review. In Interest of M.K.D.A.L., 2014 COA 148,__P.3d__. A trial court has no authority to extend the deadline contained in section (c). This rule itself says nothing about extending the deadlines established therein. Further, a trial court lacks inherent authority to extend that deadline. Farm Deals, LLLP v. State, 2012 COA 6, 300 P.3d 921. The 14-day deadline in section (d) is jurisdictional. A party's failure to timely file a petition to appeal deprives the appellate court of jurisdiction to consider the appeal. Farm Deals, LLLP v. State, 2012 COA 6, 300 P.3d 921. An appellate court may, for good cause, extend the time for filing under section (d) of this rule. Pursuant to C.A.R. 26(b), an appellate court may, for good cause shown, enlarge time prescribed under the Colorado appellate rules. Farm Deals, LLLP v. State, 2012 COA 6, 300 P.3d 921. Motion to trial court to reconsider disqualification order did not toll the provisions of section (c) requiring the filing of a motion or stipulation for certification by the trial court within 14 days after the date of the disqualification order. The trial court does not have authority pursuant to C.R.C.P 6(b) to extend the 14-day deadline for filing a motion for certification of issues in the trial court. The department of human services' motion for reconsideration was not a C.R.C.P. 59 motion. Further, C.A.R. 26(b) does not apply because the failure to timely file was not the result of excusable neglect. People ex rel. A.M.C., 2014 COA 31,__P.3d__. Generally, an issue of contract interpretation that applies well-settled principles is not a "question of law" for purposes of this rule. Rich v. Ball Ranch P'ship, 2015 COA 6, 345 P.3d 980. Applied in Kowalchikv. Brohl, 2012 COA 25, 277 P.3d 885; Triple Crown at Observatory Vill. Ass'n v. Vill. Homes of Colo., Inc., 2013 COA 144,__P.3d__. .