Laserfiche WebLink
determine the threshold issue of whether Plaintiff Hockstadt's claims are barred by sovereign <br />immunity or whether immunity is waived. Trinity, 848 P.2d at 924-25; Lafitte v. State Highway <br />Department, 885 P. 2d 338, 341-342 (Colo. App. 1994). Indeed, as the trier of fact, this Court <br />must consider all competent evidence and resolve all disputed facts to determine whether the <br />plaintiff has proven the subject matter jurisdiction. Swieckowski v. City of Ft. Collins, 934 P.2d <br />1380, 1384 (Colo. 1997); Trinity, 848 P.2d at 924. <br />In order to establish subject matter jurisdiction, Plaintiff must prove each and every <br />element of the applicable waiver by a preponderance of the evidence. Reynolds v. State Board <br />for Community Colleges, 937 P.2d 774, (Colo.App. 1996); Denmark v. State, 954 P.2d 624 <br />(Colo.App. 1997). In making its determination, this Court acts as fact-finder and may consider <br />any competent evidence pertaining to the immunity issue. Fogg v. Macaluso, 892 P.2d 271 <br />(Colo. 1995). The trial court must make detailed factual findings to support each of its <br />conclusions with respect to the element of the waiver. Lafitte v. State Highway Department, 885 <br />P.2d 338, 341 (Colo. App. 1994). <br />In determining sovereign immunity, the Court does not accept the well-pled allegations <br />of Plaintiffs' complaint as true. Trinity, 848 P. 2d at 925. Plaintiffs must prove the allegations of <br />the Complaint in order to establish this Court's jurisdiction and proceed with their claims. <br />Reynolds v. State Board for Community Colleges & Occupational Education, 937 P.2d 774 <br />(Colo.App. 1996). (emphasis added) <br />Although the Court, in making its ruling, can determine the issue of immunity as a matter <br />of law if all relevant facts are undisputed, when there are issues of disputed fact, the Court <br />3