Laserfiche WebLink
If either party in a civil action believes that the judgment of the county court is in <br />error, he may appeal to the district court by filing a notice of appeal in the county court <br />within fifteen days after the date of entry of judgment and by filing within fifteen days an <br />appeal bond with the clerk of the county court. See C.R.S. §13-6-311(1)(a). A motion <br />for a new trial is not required as a condition of appeal. See C.R.S. § 13-6-311(1)(b). If a <br />motion for new trial is made within fifteen days, the time for appeal shall be extended <br />until fifteen days after disposition of the motion, but only matters raised on the motion for <br />new trial shall be considered on an appeal thereafter. See C.R.S. §13-6-311(1)(b). <br />Appeals from final judgments of the county courts shall betaken to the district court for <br />the judicial district in which the county court entering such judgment is located. See <br />C.R.S. §13-6-310(1). The district court shall review the case on the record on appeal and <br />affvm, reverse, remand, or modify the judgment; except that the district court, in its <br />discretion, may remand the case for a new trial with such instructions as it tray deem . <br />necessary, or it may direct that the case be tried de novo before the district Court. See <br />C.R.S. §13-6-310(2). Where the district court does not direct that the case be tried de <br />novo before the district court...the appeal is limited to review of the record on appeal and <br />a consideration of the accompanying briefs and azguments. See People v. Brown, 485 <br />'r. P.2d 500 (Colo. 1971). The function of the reviewing court is to correct any errors of law <br />committed by the trial court and not to try, nor retry, issues of fact. See People v. <br />Williams, 473 P.2d 982 (Colo. 1970). <br />R. CONCLUSIONS AND ORDERS <br />Defendants argue the county court's ruling should be dismissed due to lack of <br />subject matter jurisdiction and personal jurisdiction. Each azgument will be addressed <br />below. <br />First, Defendants azgue the county court did not have subject matter jurisdiction. <br />Subject matter jurisdiction is the court's authority to deal with the class of cases in which <br />it renders judgment. See Stuckey v. Stuckey, 768 P.2d 694 (Colo. 1989). County courts <br />have limited jurisdiction. See Colo. Const. Art. VI, §l. However, county courts have <br />jurisdiction when specifically conferred by law. See C.R,S. §13-6-105(1). Subject <br />matter jurisdiction was conferred upon the county court by C.R.S. §30-28-124.5(1). The <br />title of the statute is "county court actions for civil penalties for zoning violations." Id. <br />Subsection 1 states "any person...violating any such regulation, provision, or aatendment <br />thereof or any provision of this part 1 may be subject to the imposition, 6y order of the <br />county court, of a civil penalty." Id. (Emphasis added). Therefore the county court's <br />finding of subject matter jurisdiction is AFFIItMED. - <br />Second, Defendants argue the county court did not have personal jurisdiction. <br />Personal jurisdiction is the court's power to subject a particulaz defendant to a court's <br />decisions. See The Packaging Store, Inc. v. Leung, 917 P.2d 361 (Colo. App. 1996). A <br />defendant subjects himself to the jurisdiction of the court when he enters a general <br />appeazance. Two requirements must be met to render an act adequate to support the <br />inference that it is an appearance: {1) knowledge of the pending proceeding; (2) an <br />intention to appear. Seeln Re the Marriage of Noon, 735 P.2d 884 (Colo. App. 1986). ` <br />