Colorado Code
Part 1 - General Provisions
§ 14-13-102. Definitions

As used in this article 13, unless the context otherwise requires:

Source: L. 2000: Entire article R&RE, p. 1519, § 1, effective July 1. L. 2008: (7) amended, p. 333, § 2, effective August 5. L. 2012: (7)(a) and (13)(a) amended, (SB 12-175), ch. 208, p. 834, § 35, effective July 1. L. 2013: (7)(b) amended, (HB 13-1200), ch. 174, p. 635, § 3, effective July 1. L. 2014: (3) and (4) amended, (HB 14-1362), ch. 374, p. 1790, § 6, effective June 6. L. 2017: IP and (4) amended, (HB 17-1110), ch. 137, p. 459, § 3, effective August 9.
Editor's note: This section is similar to former § 14-13-103 as it existed prior to 2000.
The UCCJA did not contain a definition of "child." The definition here is taken from the PKPA.
The definition of "child-custody determination" now closely tracks the PKPA definition. It encompasses any judgment, decree or other order which provides for the custody of, or visitation with, a child, regardless of local terminology, including such labels as "managing conservatorship" or "parenting plan."
The definition of "child-custody proceeding" has been expanded from the comparable definition in the UCCJA. These listed proceedings have generally been determined to be the type of proceeding to which the UCCJA and PKPA are applicable. The list of examples removes any controversy about the types of proceedings where a custody determination can occur. Proceedings that affect access to the child are subject to this Act. The inclusion of proceedings related to protection from domestic violence is necessary because in some States domestic violence proceedings may affect custody of and visitation with a child. Juvenile delinquency or proceedings to confer contractual rights are not "custody proceedings" because they do not relate to civil aspects of access to a child. While a determination of paternity is covered under the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act, the custody and visitation aspects of paternity cases are custody proceedings. Cases involving the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction have not been included at this point because custody of the child is not determined in a proceeding under the International Child Abductions Remedies Act. Those proceedings are specially included in the part 3 enforcement process.
"Commencement" has been included in the definitions as a replacement for the term "pending" found in the UCCJA. Its inclusion simplifies some of the simultaneous proceedings provisions of this Act.
The definition of "home State" has been reworded slightly. No substantive change is intended from the UCCJA.
The term "issuing State" is borrowed from UIFSA. In UIFSA, it refers to the court that issued the support or parentage order. Here, it refers to the State, or the court, which made the custody determination that is sought to be enforced. It is used primarily in part 3.
The term "person" has been added to ensure that the provisions of this Act apply when the State is the moving party in a custody proceeding or has legal custody of a child. The definition of "person" is the one that is mandated for all Uniform Acts.
The term "person acting as a parent" has been slightly redefined. It has been broadened from the definition in the UCCJA to include a person who has acted as a parent for a significant period of time prior to the filing of the custody proceeding as well as a person who currently has physical custody of the child. In addition, a person acting as a parent must either have legal custody or claim a right to legal custody under the law of this State. The reference to the law of this State means that a court determines the issue of whether someone is a "person acting as a parent" under its own law. This reaffirms the traditional view that a court in a child custody case applies its own substantive law. The court does not have to undertake a choice-of-law analysis to determine whether the individual who is claiming to be a person acting as a parent has standing to seek custody of the child.
The definition of "tribe" is the one mandated for use in Uniform Acts. Should a State choose to apply this Act to tribal adjudications, this definition should be enacted as well as the entirety of Section 104. (Note: Section 104 of the Act deals with the application to Indian tribes. Colorado did not adopt this section of the Act.)
The term "contestant" as has been omitted from this revision. It was defined in the UCCJA § 2(1) as "a person, including a parent, who claims a right to custody or visitation rights with respect to a child." It seems to have served little purpose over the years, and whatever function it once had has been subsumed by state laws on who has standing to seek custody of or visitation with a child. In addition UCCJA § 2(5) of the which defined "decree" and "custody decree" has been eliminated as duplicative of the definition of "custody determination."