Rocky Mountain Ass'n of Credit Management v. District Court

565 P.2d 1345, 193 Colo. 344, 1977 Colo. LEXIS 803
CourtSupreme Court of Colorado
DecidedJune 27, 1977
Docket27538
StatusPublished
Cited by193 cases

This text of 565 P.2d 1345 (Rocky Mountain Ass'n of Credit Management v. District Court) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Colorado primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Rocky Mountain Ass'n of Credit Management v. District Court, 565 P.2d 1345, 193 Colo. 344, 1977 Colo. LEXIS 803 (Colo. 1977).

Opinion

MR. CHIEF JUSTICE PRINGLE

delivered the opinion of the Court.

On January 25, 1977, judgment was entered in favor of petitioner Rocky Mountain Association of Credit Management and against one R. Jan Rogge. The district court issued a 30-day stay of execution. During those 30 days, Rocky Mountain Credit requested a transcript of the docket entry of judgment and tendered the $1.50 fee required by section 13-32-104(1 )(g), C.R.S. 1973. The clerk refused to issue the transcript until after the stay of execution expired. We issued a rule to show cause why a writ should not be granted prohibiting the respondent court clerk from refusing to issue a transcript of judgment immediately after entry of judgment. We now make the rule absolute.

I.

Respondents argue that this case is moot because Rocky Mountain Credit has, in fact, received a transcript of judgment. While it is true that a transcript was issued on March 1, 1977, we hold that the question of the clerk’s refusal to issue the transcript during the 30-day stay of execution may properly be reviewed in a proceeding such as is here presented; We adhere to the doctrine that where the controversy is “capable of repetition, yet evading review” a court may elect to settle the controversy so as to establish a precedent for future action by trial courts. *346 Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113, 93 S.Ct. 705, 35 L.Ed.2d 147 (1973); Southern Pacific Terminal Co. v. ICC, 219 U.S. 498, 31 S.Ct. 279, 55 L.Ed. 310 (1911); Bestway Disposal v. Public Utilities Commission, 184 Colo. 428, 520 P.2d 1039 (1974); Page v. Blunt, 126 Colo. 324, 248 P.2d 1074 (1952).

Here, the time required to complete the legal process will necessarily render each specific challenge moot. Unless we agree to resolve the question, petitioners and others similarly situated would be forever deprived of the opportunity of review. See Roe v. Wade, supra.

II.

The respondents also argue that the rule should be discharged because the petitioners have failed to join the district judge as a party.

Where the district judge is the essential party respondent, he must be joined in an original action which challenges the jurisdiction of the court. James v. James, 95 Colo. 1, 32 P.2d 821 (1934). In this action, however, the petitioners only seek an order directing the court clerk to perform what is essentially a ministerial function. The order may be directed to the clerk alone. See Keady v. Owers, 30 Colo. 1, 69 P. 509 (1902). The district judge, therefore, need not be a party and the petitioner’s failure to join him has no relevant effect.

III.

Rocky Mountain Credit asserts that creditors are entitled to receive a transcript of judgment after judgment is entered although a stay of execution is in effect. We agree.

Many creditors’ rights are directly affected by the timeliness with which a transcript of judgment is recorded. For instance, in Colorado, in order for a creditor to obtain a judgment lien upon real property he must file a transcript of judgment with the county recorder. Section 13-52-102, C.R.S. 1973. And his priority in relation to other creditors is established by the date of filing. So also a lien may be valid or invalid as a preference in bankruptcy proceedings depending upon the date of its recording.

The recording of the transcript of judgment does not, however, in and of itself, effect an execution upon the property of the debtor. The stay of execution prevents enforcement of the lien until such time as it expires, and, by virtue of the stay, the debtor is protected pending final resolution of the case. Clearly the statutes and the rules are designed to protect the interests of both creditor and debtor, and the stay of execution provided for in C.R.C.P. 62 has no effect on the requirement that a transcript of judgment be issued on payment of the fee. Section 13-32-104(1 )(g), C.R.S. 1973.

The rule is made absolute.

MR. JUSTICE HODGES and MR. JUSTICE CARRIGAN do not participate.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Ball v. Loveland
Colorado Court of Appeals, 2026
Long v. Colorado Parole
Colorado Court of Appeals, 2025
Peo v. Germain
Colorado Court of Appeals, 2024
Anderson v. Applewood Water Ass'n, Inc
2015 COA 162 (Colorado Court of Appeals, 2016)
People ex rel. Vivekanathan
2013 COA 143 (Colorado Court of Appeals, 2013)
WELLS FARGO BANK, NA., ASSOC. v. Kopfman
205 P.3d 437 (Colorado Court of Appeals, 2008)
Freedom from Religion Foundation, Inc. v. Romer
921 P.2d 84 (Colorado Court of Appeals, 1996)
FREEDOM FROM RELIGION FOUN. v. Romer
921 P.2d 84 (Colorado Court of Appeals, 1996)
Campbell v. Meyer
883 P.2d 617 (Colorado Court of Appeals, 1994)
In Re Whatley
155 B.R. 775 (D. Colorado, 1993)
United States v. Theos
709 F. Supp. 1007 (D. Colorado, 1989)
Lininger v. City of Sheridan Ex Rel. People
648 P.2d 1097 (Colorado Court of Appeals, 1982)
Tomasi v. Thompson
635 P.2d 538 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1981)
Reeve v. Career Service Board of Denver
636 P.2d 1307 (Colorado Court of Appeals, 1981)
L. O. W. v. District Court In & for the County of Arapahoe
623 P.2d 1253 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1981)
Low v. DISTRICT COURT, ETC.
623 P.2d 1253 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1981)
Cloverleaf Kennel Club, Inc. v. Colorado Racing Commission
620 P.2d 1051 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1980)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
565 P.2d 1345, 193 Colo. 344, 1977 Colo. LEXIS 803, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rocky-mountain-assn-of-credit-management-v-district-court-colo-1977.