Colorado Court of Appeals Affirms Dismissal in Long-Running Divorce Case, Revives Wife’s Attorney Fees Claim

In a significant Colorado family law decision argued by the Law Office of Joel M Pratt, the Colorado Court of Appeals ruled in Marriage of Johnson (Case No. 24CA0197) that a 2009 order dismissing a legal separation case effectively ended the entire proceeding — nullifying any attempt by the husband to convert it into a divorce 14 years later. This appellate ruling reaffirms the importance of clear language in court motions and reinforces protections against relitigating closed family law matters.

Background: A Complicated Marital History

The parties married in 1993 and legally separated in 2001. They continued to cohabit and reconcile multiple times over the years, including jointly filing taxes and living as a family. In 2008, Husband attempted to convert the legal separation into a dissolution of marriage, but after further reconciliation, his attorney filed a “Motion to Dismiss” in 2009. The motion stated the couple had reconciled and requested dismissal of the action. The Court granted that request.

Husband did not challenge the order until 2022, when he again sought to convert the separation into a divorce.

Colorado Court of Appeals Decision: Entire Case Was Dismissed in 2009

The Colorado Court of Appeals upheld the lower court’s ruling that the 2009 dismissal ended the case entirely. The appellate judges found the motion to dismiss and subsequent order were unambiguous. The term “action,” used in both documents, was interpreted under Colorado civil procedure as referring to the entire legal case — not just pending motions.

The panel also emphasized the couple’s post-2009 conduct, which supported the conclusion that the separation agreement had been effectively abandoned.

The panel also rejected the argument that dismissing a legal separation required a more formal stipulation or explicit judicial findings, noting that Rule 41(a)(2) permits dismissals via court order when deemed proper.

Wife’s Cross-Appeal: Attorney Fees Claim Revived

Wife cross-appealed after the district court denied her motion for attorney fees under Colorado Revised Statutes § 13-17-102, which allows recovery when a party’s legal position lacks substantial justification. The Colorado Court of Appeals reversed this denial, finding her request was timely under procedural rules and that the court erred by dismissing it on technical grounds.

The appellate court remanded the case back to the trial court to evaluate whether Wife should be awarded attorney fees — including those incurred on appeal.

Legal Takeaways for Colorado Family Law Practitioners

This decision reinforces several key points in Colorado family law and appellate practice:

• Dismissals Must Be Taken Seriously: A motion to dismiss a family law case—if broadly worded—can terminate all aspects of the case, including separation agreements and decrees.

• Plain Language Matters: The appellate court prioritized the “plain and ordinary meaning” of legal terms like “dismiss” and “action.”

• Conduct Post-Dismissal Can Be Determinative: How parties behave after court orders may support findings that they intended to abandon prior legal arrangements.

• Fee Claims Must Follow Proper Channels: Different procedural rules apply to different kinds of fee requests, which can be a trap for the uninitiated.

  
  
  
  

For attorneys practicing divorce and family law in Colorado, Johnson is a strong reminder of the finality of dismissals and the importance of procedural clarity — both in filings and courtroom conduct. This Court of Appeals decision is a notable example of how Colorado’s appellate courts handle long-standing domestic disputes with precision and deference to trial court credibility findings.

Need help navigating a complex family law appeal in Colorado? Our team stays current with the latest appellate decisions. Reach out today for guidance.