Where Colorado Keeps the Records That Locate a Person
The Colorado Judicial Branch will tell you itself, on its own public-records page, that access to court records is not available through its website. Three private companies stand between a researcher and a Colorado register of actions, none of them will sell you the document behind the entry, and one of the busiest trial courts in the state is not administered by the state court system at all. That court is Denver County Court, it handles roughly a hundred thousand cases a year, and it is missing from the county menu of the statewide search form. A Colorado locate is therefore a question about custody of the record before it is a question about the person. Everything reached here is a public record or data held under licence, the lawful reason for the search is written down before a file opens. General information about Colorado records practice, not legal advice.
The Short Version
Colorado skip tracing is governed by a split between what the state publishes and what it does not. The Judicial Branch runs a free statewide docket search, but a docket is a calendar: dated, six months at most, and showing a person only if a court event is scheduled. For the register of actions the Branch routes you to three commercial vendors, none of which supply document copies. Denver is the only district that is not a combined court, and Denver County Court is missing from the statewide form’s county menu. Two constraints bound our side: public records and licensed data only, and a lawful reason recorded in writing before a Colorado file is opened.
The Branch Publishes Dockets. It Does Not Publish Records.
Two different tools, routinely described as one, and the difference decides whether a search can work.
Start with the sentence that governs everything else. On its Access Guide to Public Records, the Colorado Judicial Branch writes: “Limited access to court records is available online through the third-party vendors linked below. Access to court records is not available directly through the Colorado Judicial Branch website.“
That is a remarkable thing for a state judiciary to say about itself, and most published guidance to Colorado records does not repeat it. What the Branch does publish is something narrower and genuinely useful, and the two get conflated constantly.
What the free search is, precisely
The Branch’s Docket Search is a calendar. Read the form’s own instruction: “At least one filter in addition to date is required to perform this search.” Date is not optional, it is the spine. The date control offers a range of Today, one week, one month, three months or six months at the outside, or one specific day. Around that you may filter by judicial district, by county, by individual courthouse, by court type, by case number with a four-digit year, by case class, by party name for an individual or a business, and by attorney name or bar number.
All of which is real and worth using. But notice what it means for finding a person: the docket search returns someone only if they have a hearing set inside the window. A case that closed last year, a judgment already entered, a matter with nothing currently scheduled – none of them appear, no matter how carefully you spell the name. It answers “when is this person due in court”, not “has this person ever been in court”. Those are different questions and only one of them is the skip-tracing question. When that is the question you are holding, order a Colorado skip trace and we buy the register entry, request the paper from the court that holds it and search Denver County Court directly.
The three companies, and what none of them will give you
For the register of actions, the Branch names its vendors and marks which channels each serves. Background Information Services and LexisNexis Colorado Courts Record Search are both listed as serving business-to-consumer and business-to-business users; Tessera Data is listed for business-to-business only. The Branch states there are charges and tells you to ask the vendor.
Then comes the limit that catches people out. In the Branch’s words, “Copies of documents are not available from any of the commercial sites”. You can buy the index. You cannot buy the paper. A complaint that recites an address, an affidavit of service, a garnishment answer naming an employer – all of it comes from the individual court where it was filed, or from a records request, and never from the vendor whose entry told you it exists.
The Branch also disclaims completeness in terms: “The information on this website does not represent all the cases or case types filed with the Colorado courts.” A register that covers civil, civil water, small claims, domestic, felony, misdemeanour and traffic is broad, but it is not a warranty, and the Branch declines to give one.
Rules sit above all of it
Three separate instruments decide what a custodian may release, and they are not interchangeable. Chief Justice Directive 05-01 governs court records and, at section 4.40, the compiled or aggregate data requests that are handled on a form and may carry a cost. P.A.I.R.R. 2, Colorado Supreme Court Rule Chapter 38 Rule 2, governs the Judicial Department’s administrative records, which are a different category with a different custodian. And the Criminal Justice Records Act, section 24-72-301 and following of the Colorado Revised Statutes, governs criminal proceedings, with section 24-72-305 letting a custodian deny inspection where disclosure is prohibited by law, Supreme Court rule or court order, or would be contrary to the public interest. Juvenile material answers to the Children’s Code at section 19-1-301 and following. Asking the wrong instrument’s question gets a technically correct refusal.
Denver Is Four Courts, and the State Runs Only Three
Every other Colorado district is one combined court. The Second is not, and the exception is written down.
In sixty-three of Colorado’s sixty-four counties the arrangement is simple: one district court takes civil, criminal, probate and juvenile business, with a county court underneath it, and both are administered by the state. Denver is the exception, and the Judicial Branch states the exception in its own words on the Denver Juvenile Court page: “Unlike other judicial districts in Colorado, the Second Judicial District is not a combined court and is comprised of four separate courts: County Court, District Court, Probate Court, and Juvenile Court.”
You can see the same fact structurally rather than textually. In the Branch’s Trial Courts by District directory, every district from the First to the Twenty-Third is listed as a set of counties. The Second is the only entry listed as a set of courts. And of those four courts, three link to pages on the Judicial Branch’s own domain while the fourth links away entirely, to denvercountycourt.org.
The court that is both municipal and state
Denver County Court describes itself on its own site as “both a municipal and state court and one of the busiest courts in Colorado, processing on average 100,000 cases annually”, with nineteen judges, four full-time magistrates and nearly 270 staff. Its docket is exactly the one a locate cares about: municipal criminal, traffic and juvenile matters, state misdemeanours, felony advisements, bond setting and preliminary hearings, civil matters not exceeding twenty-five thousand dollars, small claims, protection orders and state traffic violations. It also reviews every arrest and search warrant for the Second Judicial District.
The Judicial Branch’s access guide flags the consequence twice on one page, once for records and once for data, in each case sending you to a Denver address rather than a state one: Denver County Court is administered separately from the state courts. And the statewide Docket Search form makes it visible from a third angle – its county menu offers “Denver – District”, “Denver – Juvenile” and “Denver – Probate”, and no Denver County Court option at all.
Put those together and the practical rule is short. In Denver, the ordinary small-money civil judgment, the small claim and the protection order – the records most likely to carry a current address for an ordinary person – sit in the one Colorado court that the state’s own tools do not reach. A researcher who runs the state search, gets nothing, and reports Denver as clear has searched three courts out of four. Where the underlying question is enforcement rather than location, that belongs with our note on collecting a Colorado judgment. Coverage of the metro’s neighbourhoods, suburbs and address churn sits on the Denver metro locate page rather than here.
And a Twenty-Fourth Judicial District that is one courtroom
Colorado’s trial districts are numbered to twenty-three. The Denver Probate Court then adds a number of its own: “The Denver Probate Court, referred to as the 24th Judicial District, encompasses all of the City and County of Denver. The Colorado Constitution Article VI section 9(3) created the Denver Probate Court and defines its jurisdiction.”
Its exclusive jurisdiction, as that page quotes it, runs to “all matters of probate, settlements of estates of deceased persons, appointment of guardians, conservators and administrators, and settlement of their accounts, the adjudication of the mentally ill, and such other jurisdiction as may be provided by law”, plus Extreme Risk Protection Order matters filed in Denver County. The court dates to 1965, when David Brofman – who had been hearing probate as a Denver County Judge since 1951 – became its first judge.
For heir and beneficiary work this matters more than it sounds. An estate file has to name and notice the people entitled to take, and an heir who wants a distribution has to say where to send it, which makes probate one of the most address-rich record types anywhere. In Denver those files are in a dedicated court with its own designation, not in a probate division of a general district court, and a request addressed to the district court is addressed to the wrong institution.
The Twenty-Third is new, and most sources have not caught up
One more numbering point, because it changes which courthouse to write to. Colorado now has twenty-three judicial districts, not the twenty-two that a great deal of published guidance still reports. Counted off two independent Judicial Branch sources – the Trial Courts by District listing and the Docket Search form’s own district menu, which runs First through Twenty-Third – the Twenty-Third Judicial District comprises Douglas, Elbert and Lincoln counties, and the Eighteenth, which formerly held them, is now Arapahoe County alone. If your file is in Castle Rock, Kiowa or Hugo, the district that holds it is not the district an older reference will give you.
Watch: Custody Before Search
Why a Colorado request has to name the custodian before it names the person.
Watch Overview
Seven River Basins Print a Name List Every Month
A record type peculiar to Colorado’s water courts, and in some counties the only current paper attached to a person.
Colorado adjudicates water in dedicated courts, under the Water Right Determination and Administration Act of 1969, and the machinery is worth understanding because it generates a public document that behaves like nothing else in American records practice.
The Judicial Branch’s Water Courts page sets out the structure. There are seven water divisions, one for each major river basin, numbered Division 1 through Division 7. Each is staffed with “a division engineer appointed by the state engineer, a water judge appointed by the Supreme Court, a water referee appointed by the water judge, and a water clerk assigned by the district court”. Water judges are district judges with jurisdiction over the determination of water rights, the use and administration of water, and all other water matters in the division.
The resume, and why it reads like a directory
Here is the part that matters to a locate. In the Branch’s description, “Water matters are generally commenced in a water court by the filing of an application with the water clerk. The water clerk publishes a summary of each application that is filed in the monthly water court ‘resume’ and in a legal notice in one or more newspapers.” Interested persons may then file statements of opposition within the statutory period, and owners of affected rights must appear and object or be barred from later claiming injury.
So every month, in each of seven basins, a court clerk publishes a list naming who applied for what, and newspapers carry it as a legal notice. Objectors then file and name themselves in reply. The result is a recurring, dated, publicly circulated roll of people with a claim tied to specific land – produced whether or not any of those people has a mortgage, a lease, a utility account or a mailbox that a commercial database has ever seen.
On the western slope and the eastern plains that is not a curiosity. A rancher, an irrigator or a small rural landholder may have a post office box for mail, no recent recorded deed, no tenancy and a thin commercial footprint, and still appear by name in a water resume this quarter because they filed for a change of use. We check the relevant division on rural Colorado files as a matter of course rather than as a last resort, and it has settled more than one file that ordinary address data had given up on.
Two supporting details from the same source, because they set expectations about the archive. All water courts have operated under a standard case definition approved by the Supreme Court in 1981, and filings have been reported annually by water division since 1 July 1981 – so the series is long and consistently defined. Separately, Colorado has eight designated ground water basins, which the Branch says are managed in the Fourth, Thirteenth, Fifteenth, Seventeenth and Nineteenth judicial districts under water judges. That is a different mechanism from the seven surface divisions and we do not treat the two as interchangeable.
One caution worth stating plainly: a water filing establishes a claim and a contact of record, not a residence. It is a lead that has to be corroborated against something that actually asserts where a person sleeps, and we present it as what it is.
Which Colorado Office Holds Which Fact
Custodian first. The right column is the assumption that most often produces a confident blank.
This is the routing sheet a Colorado file is worked against. It is arranged by what you want rather than by who you might guess, because in Colorado the guess is usually the state and the answer is usually somewhere else.
| What you want | Which custodian | The assumption that breaks it |
|---|---|---|
| A Denver small claim, protection order or civil judgment under the county-court ceiling | Denver County Court, directly Not the State | That the statewide docket form covers Denver. Its county menu has no Denver County Court entry. |
| The running history of a case anywhere in Colorado | One of three commercial vendors named by the Branch | That the Judicial Branch publishes registers of action. Its own guide says it does not. |
| The actual filed document | The individual court, or a records request | That a vendor entry comes with paper. No commercial site supplies document copies. |
| Who is due in court, and when | The Branch’s free Docket Search | That it is a case index. It is date-anchored and reaches six months at most. |
| Deeds, mortgages and recorded liens | The county Clerk and Recorder | That recording is centralised. It is a county function, county by county. |
| An estate, guardianship or conservatorship in Denver | Denver Probate Court, the Twenty-Fourth Judicial District | That probate sits in a division of the district court, as it does everywhere else in the state. |
| A water claim tied to land | The water clerk for that division, and the monthly resume | That water filings are an agency matter. They are court filings, published as legal notices. |
| Compiled or aggregate court data | State Court Administrator’s Office, under Chief Justice Directive 05-01 | That a data request and a case request travel the same route. They are different forms and may carry cost. |
| A residential address for an Address Confidentiality Program participant | Nobody, by design | That there is a route. There is a substitute address, and this firm does not go behind it. |
Two Refusals, Written Against Colorado Offices
Stated here rather than buried, because both of them shape what this firm will and will not take on.
Not a consumer reporting agency, and a Colorado locate is not a screening product
Denver County Court’s civil ceiling of twenty-five thousand dollars means a great deal of Colorado landlord and lender work ends up in front of it, so this boundary needs to be unmistakable rather than tucked into a terms page. This firm is not a consumer reporting agency, and a Colorado locate report is not a consumer report either. That closes off a specific set of uses, in your hands every bit as much as in ours. Nothing produced here may lawfully decide whether somebody is granted a lease in Aurora or Fort Collins, whether they are hired or promoted, whether credit is advanced to them, or what an insurer charges them. Screening a rental applicant and vetting a job candidate are the two requests that reach this desk most often, and both sit wholly outside the work. Congress put those decisions behind a regulated product carrying adverse-action notices and a route for the subject to dispute what it says, and a locate report is not that product and cannot be made into one. Colorado property managers and finance companies reach us at the far end of the sequence – after somebody has gone and after a balance exists – and if the person is in front of you today with an application, the useful answer is a screening provider rather than a quote from us.
Nobody here invents a reason to be given a record
Colorado clerks publish what they hold and what it costs, and that published route is the route this firm uses. The inside of a bank or brokerage account is not something obtained here and not something reported; where a matter genuinely requires it, the instrument is a subpoena or a court order sought by your attorney. The lawful reason behind a Colorado request is recorded in the file at the moment the file opens, which means the question of why the research happened has a written answer a year later rather than a recollection. Where the real question is what a creditor may reach once the person is found, that is general legal information and sits with Colorado wage garnishment limits rather than with us.
Sixty-Four Counties, Two of Them Not Quite Counties
Counted from the federal geography file rather than from a summary, because the exceptions are the interesting part.
Colorado’s county count is one of those figures that gets repeated without anybody checking, so we counted it. Taking the Census Bureau’s 2020 national county file and filtering to Colorado gives sixty-four county-equivalents. Sixty-two of them carry class code H1, which the Bureau’s class-code list defines as “An active county or equivalent feature”.
The remaining two carry class code H6, defined as “A county that is coextensive with an incorporated place, part of an incorporated place, or a consolidated city and the government functions of the county are part of the municipal government”. Those two are Denver and Broomfield.
That is a federal geographer’s way of recording the same thing the Judicial Branch records in its own vocabulary. Denver’s difference is not a quirk of the court system alone; the entity itself is a city whose county functions belong to a municipal government, and Broomfield is the only other place in Colorado built that way. In the other sixty-two, recording is a county Clerk and Recorder function and a deed, mortgage or lien is indexed county by county rather than anywhere central. That decides the shape of an asset search run behind a Colorado judgment: with no central register of recorded interests to query, the work is a list of counties chosen for stated reasons – where the debtor has lived, worked, held land or filed for water – and a result that names the counties nobody reached, because an empty index in Jefferson County says nothing whatever about the other sixty-three.
Where the population actually is, and what that does to a search radius
Colorado’s people are concentrated along a narrow north-south corridor at the foot of the mountains, with the rest of a very large state thinly settled. A move within that corridor can cross two or three county lines without anybody changing their commute, their employer or their dentist, which is precisely the move that defeats a single-county search. Denver, Adams, Arapahoe, Jefferson, Douglas and Broomfield interlock closely enough that treating any one of them as the whole search area is usually an error, and Boulder, Larimer and Weld extend the same pattern northward.
South of that, the Pikes Peak region behaves as its own labour and housing market rather than as a Denver suburb, and it has its own judicial district and its own recording offices; our Colorado Springs and Pikes Peak coverage deals with that region on its own terms. West of the Continental Divide the pattern inverts entirely: distances are long, counties are small in population, resort economies produce seasonal and shared housing that address data handles badly, and the water record described above sometimes carries more current information about a person than anything a database will sell you. On the eastern plains the same thinness applies without the resort layer.
Colorado also touches seven other states, and the borders are not symmetrical in what they do to a file. The northern and southern lines are ordinary interstate moves. The eastern edge runs into Kansas and Nebraska farm country where a short move can change states without changing anything else about a life. Where a last known address sits near any of those lines, the neighbouring state goes into the first pass rather than being kept in reserve. The general approach to placing a person in this state is set out on our finding someone in Colorado page.
The Order a Colorado File Runs In
Custodian, then coverage, then corroboration – and every gap named in writing.
Decide Which System Holds It
Before any search runs, the file is sorted into state courts, Denver County Court, a county Clerk and Recorder, or a water division. In Colorado that sort is the whole game, and getting it wrong produces a clean-looking blank.
Read the Docket for What It Can Say
The free docket search is run for what it genuinely answers – scheduled events inside its window – and its result is recorded as that. An empty docket is never written up as an absence of litigation.
Buy the Index, Then Go for the Paper
Where a register entry matters, the document behind it is requested from the court that holds it, because no commercial source in Colorado supplies copies and an index line rarely carries an address.
Date Every Address Against Something Filed
A hit is not a finding until a dated instrument supports it – a recording, a filing, a notice. The report says which document dates the address and how recently, so you can weigh it yourself.
Six Colorado Searches That Fail Politely
Each returns an answer that is true of the thing asked and false of the question intended.
Denver Searched Through the State
Three of Denver’s four courts answer. The fourth, handling roughly 100,000 cases a year, was never in the county menu.
A Docket Read as a Case History
Nothing scheduled in the window looks identical to nothing ever filed, and the form will not tell you which it is.
An Index Line Mistaken for a Document
The vendor confirms a case exists. The address is in the paper, and no vendor in Colorado sells the paper.
An Eighteenth District Address Book
Douglas, Elbert and Lincoln moved to the Twenty-Third. Older references send the request to the wrong courthouse.
Probate Asked of the District Court
Everywhere but Denver that is correct. In Denver it is a separate court with a separate designation.
One Front Range County Searched Alone
The corridor’s counties interlock. A move of a few miles changes the recorder without changing the life.
The Requests We Turn Down, and the Six-Hour Window That Explains It
Colorado built one staffed door to a protected participant and put the building itself out of reach.
Colorado runs its Address Confidentiality Program out of the Department of Personnel and Administration’s Division of Central Services. It provides survivors of stalking, sexual assault and domestic violence with a legal substitute address and mail forwarding, with a separate track for protected healthcare workers, and in the programme’s own words, “Under Colorado law, all state and local government agencies must accept a participant’s substitute address.” Since it began in July 2008 it states it has served over 16,600 victim-survivors.
Two sentences on that page settle the matter more firmly than any policy of ours could. The first: “The ACP accepts service of process for current program participants from 9:00 a.m. until 3:00 p.m. Monday-Friday, excluding holidays.” The second: “The ACP is located in a secure State facility with no public access.”
Read them together and you can see exactly what Colorado decided. There is a lawful way to reach a participant with legal papers, it is a staffed six-hour window at a single office, and the office itself is closed to the public so that the address behind the substitute cannot be inferred from a visit. The state did not merely withhold a datum. It designed a channel and then shut every other door on purpose.
We are not another door. A request that reads as an attempt to reach a former partner, a person who holds or has sought a Colorado protection order, or somebody whose move looks calculated to put distance between themselves and whoever is asking, is refused outright. Not trimmed down to a county. Not answered halfway with a caveat attached. Not passed along to a firm with a looser view of the question. No vocabulary shifts that: not the framing the request arrives in, not the reason volunteered for it, not the version of the relationship offered in support. Having spent this much of a page mapping which Colorado office holds which record, it would be incoherent to go quiet about the one record this firm will not go near.
If you are the person a search like this would be looking for
We are the wrong firm to contact and would rather say so than sell you anything. The routes that exist are the Address Confidentiality Program itself on its published number, a Colorado domestic violence or victim services programme, and the court that can issue or extend a protection order. Enrolment is not something this firm administers, safety planning is not something it is competent to advise on, and nothing written on this page should be treated as guidance for keeping your own address out of reach.
Court-connected work is the case that stays open
None of this shuts out legitimate court business. A process server holding a Colorado case number, a named party and an attorney behind the request is carrying out something the court itself set in motion, and locating that party is the outcome the court expects. Colorado has in fact drawn this distinction for us, and drawn it in the architecture rather than in a policy document: the Address Confidentiality Program takes legal papers across a counter during stated hours, and shields the residence absolutely. Papers a Colorado court is waiting on are one thing. A private search for where a protected person sleeps is another, and the programme’s design says so. Which of the two a request actually amounts to gets asked, and answered in writing, before any Colorado file is opened. The mechanics of putting a located debtor in front of an enforcement officer are covered in our note on locating a judgment debtor.
Who Sends Us Colorado Files
Six recurring requests, and the Colorado-specific thing each one turns on.
Litigators Sorting Denver
Placing a matter in the right one of the Second District’s four courts
Enforcing a Colorado Judgment
Clerk and Recorder indexes read one Front Range county at a time
Servers Crossing Divides
An address dated before anybody commits to a mountain pass
Heirs to Denver Estates
Files held by a court of their own, not by a probate division
Lenders on Defaulted Notes
A balance that already exists, never an application under review
Owners After a Tenancy Ends
A departed tenant and a sum owed, never a screening decision
What a Colorado Report Commits To
Every finding names the custodian it came from and which system that custodian belongs to, so a Denver County Court entry is never presented as though the state produced it. Anything that came from a commercial register is labelled as an index entry rather than a document, because in this state those are genuinely different things. Courts, counties and divisions that were not searched are listed as not searched, and a docket that showed nothing is written up as a docket that showed nothing rather than as a clean record. Public records and lawfully licensed data are the only inputs that ever reach a Colorado report, no file opens before its lawful reason is on paper, and none of that has changed here since 2004.
Frequently Asked Questions
Does Colorado have a free statewide search for court records?
It has a free statewide search for court dockets, which is not the same thing. The Judicial Branch’s Docket Search covers all twenty-three judicial districts and filters by county, courthouse, court type, case class, party name and attorney, but its own form states that at least one filter in addition to date is required, and its widest date range is six months. It reports scheduled court events. For the register of actions, the Branch’s Access Guide to Public Records says access is not available directly through its website and directs you to three commercial vendors instead.
Why is Denver County Court missing from the state court search?
Because it is administered separately from the state courts, a point the Judicial Branch’s access guide makes twice on one page, each time giving a Denver contact address rather than a state one. The statewide Docket Search reflects it: the county menu offers Denver District, Denver Juvenile and Denver Probate, and no Denver County Court option. Denver County Court describes itself as both a municipal and state court handling around 100,000 cases a year, including small claims, protection orders and civil matters up to twenty-five thousand dollars, so a great deal of ordinary record sits outside the state’s own search tool.
How many judicial districts does Colorado have?
Twenty-three, and a good deal of published guidance still says twenty-two. Counted from two independent Judicial Branch sources, the Trial Courts by District listing and the Docket Search form’s own district menu, the districts run from the First to the Twenty-Third. The Twenty-Third comprises Douglas, Elbert and Lincoln counties, and the Eighteenth, which previously included them, is now Arapahoe County on its own. Separately, the Denver Probate Court’s page describes that court as referred to as the Twenty-Fourth Judicial District, which is a designation for one specialist court rather than a twenty-fourth region.
Can I get copies of Colorado court documents from an online vendor?
No. The Judicial Branch states plainly that copies of documents are not available from any of the commercial sites, which supply the register of actions only. The register will confirm that a case exists, name the parties and show the sequence of filings, but the address you are usually after sits inside the filed paper. That comes from the individual court where the document was filed, or through an online records request, and the Branch also cautions that the information available does not represent all the cases or case types filed with Colorado courts.
Who records deeds and liens in Colorado?
The county Clerk and Recorder, county by county, with no central statewide index of recorded instruments. That matters more in Colorado than the county count suggests, because the Front Range counties interlock tightly enough that an ordinary house move can change the recording office without changing anybody’s commute or employer. Two of the sixty-four county-equivalents, Denver and Broomfield, are classified by the Census Bureau as counties whose government functions belong to a municipal government, which is the same distinctiveness the court structure shows from a different direction.
What is a Colorado water court resume, and why would a skip tracer read one?
Colorado adjudicates water rights in seven water divisions, one per river basin, each with a water judge appointed by the Supreme Court and a water clerk assigned by the district court. When an application is filed, the water clerk publishes a summary of it in a monthly document called the resume and as a legal notice in one or more newspapers, and objectors then file statements of opposition. The result is a recurring published list of named people with claims tied to specific land. In thinly settled parts of Colorado that is sometimes the most current dated public document attached to a person, though it establishes a claim and a contact of record rather than a residence.
What kind of firm is this in Colorado?
Nobody here conducts surveillance or canvasses neighbours, and no route is taken to a Colorado clerk that a member of the public could not take.
Can you find someone who is in Colorado’s Address Confidentiality Program?
No. The programme, run by the Department of Personnel and Administration’s Division of Central Services, gives survivors of stalking, sexual assault and domestic violence a legal substitute address that all state and local government agencies are required by Colorado law to accept. It accepts service of process for participants between nine in the morning and three in the afternoon on weekdays, and states that it is located in a secure State facility with no public access. Colorado built one staffed channel to reach a participant lawfully and closed the rest deliberately, and this firm does not work around that in any form.
Open a Colorado File
Tell us who you need placed, every Colorado county or address that has ever attached to them even if none of it is current, and what the research is for. Before a single search runs we settle which of Colorado’s systems holds the record; the Second Judicial District gets treated as the four courts it actually is; the docket gets read for the six months it can genuinely speak to and no further; the paper gets requested from the court itself, because no commercial register in this state will sell it to you; and every court, county and water division left unsearched is named in the report. On a file with enough to work from, a first read normally reaches you within 24 hours. Prefer to test the question before anything is opened? Get in touch and you will get a straight answer about whether Colorado’s records are likely to hold one.
Start Your Request →
