District Court City And County Of Denver Colorado Order printable pdf download

District Court City And County Of Denver Colorado Order

DISTRICT COURT, CITY AND COUNTY OF

DENVER, COLORADO

Court Address: 1437 Bannock Street

Denver, Colorado 80202

Plaintiff: ANTHONY LOBATO, as an individual and as

COURT USE ONLY

parent and natural guardian of TAYLOR LOBATO, et al.

Case Number: 05 CV 4794

Ctrm: 9

Defendants: STATE OF COLORADO; et al.

ORDER

THIS MATTER is before the Court on the motion of Defendant’s to dismiss for

lack of subject matter jurisdiction and failure to state a claim, filed August 24, 2005. The

Court has considered the motion, brief in opposition to the motion, the reply, the court

file and all relevant authorities, and being sufficiently advised, concludes as follows.

The Defendants seek to dismiss the complaint and all claims therein on the

following grounds: 1) the first claim for relief should be dismissed for failure to state a

claim because the current statutory scheme satisfies the requirements of Amendment 23

and is therefore constitutional; 2) the second claim should be dismissed because it

presents a non-justiciable political question and the Colorado Constitution commits the

determination of educational adequacy to the legislative branch; 3) the third claim for

relief under Colo. Const. Art. X, § 3 must be dismissed, because the school districts, and

not the state are the authorities in question and are therefore not subject to the uniformity

requirements; 4) the fourth claim for relief should be dismissed for lack of standing

because Plaintiffs are political subdivisions and cannot challenge statutes that direct the

performance of their duties.

STANDARD OF REVIEW

The well-established standard of review is a deferential one. In addressing a

Motion to Dismiss under C.R.C.P. 12(b)(5), the court must view the allegations in the

complaint in the light most favorable to plaintiffs, Dunlap v. Colorado Springs

Cablevision, Inc., 829 P.2d 1286 (Colo. 1992), and accept all averments of material fact

contained in the complaint as true. Rosenthal v. Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc., 908 P.2d

1095, (Colo. 1995) (quoting Shapiro & Meinhold v. Zartman, 823 P.2d 120, 122-23

(Colo. 1992)). The court cannot grant a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim

unless “it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff[s] can prove no set of facts in support of

[their] claim(s) which would entitle [them] to relief.” Dunlap, 829 P.2d at 1291.

District Court City And County Of Denver Colorado Order