Colorado uses Decision-making responsibility (legal) and parenting time (physical).. Section 14-10-124 lists best-interests factors for allocating parental responsibilities, including the child’s wishes, parental wishes, relationships, adjustment, and domestic violence. No automatic equal parenting-time presumption; courts allocate responsibilities to serve the child’s best interests and encourage frequent contact when safe. That is what separates Colorado child custody and parenting time from a generic national summary. Read Colo. Rev. Stat. §§ 14-10-123 to 14-10-129 before the background sections below. Relocation: A parent with primary residence who seeks to relocate must follow § 14-10-129 notice and best-interests procedures. Modification: A substantial change of circumstances and best interests are required for major modifications of decision-making or parenting time.
Legal custody, physical custody, and parenting time
Decision-making responsibility (legal) and parenting time (physical).
No automatic equal parenting-time presumption; courts allocate responsibilities to serve the child’s best interests and encourage frequent contact when safe.
Relocation with a child
A parent with primary residence who seeks to relocate must follow § 14-10-129 notice and best-interests procedures.
Modifying a Colorado custody order
A substantial change of circumstances and best interests are required for major modifications of decision-making or parenting time.
A concrete Colorado scenario
Here is one way the Colorado pieces fit together. Change any fact and the statute may point somewhere else.
Two parents in Colorado disagree about where the child lives during the school week, and one wants to move.
- Use the labels Colorado actually uses: Decision-making responsibility (legal) and parenting time (physical)..
- Apply the best-interests factors: Section 14-10-124 lists best-interests factors for allocating parental responsibilities, including the child’s wishes, parental wishes, relationships, adjustment, and domestic violence.
- Check any parenting presumption: No automatic equal parenting-time presumption; courts allocate responsibilities to serve the child’s best interests and encourage frequent contact when safe.
- If a move is proposed: A parent with primary residence who seeks to relocate must follow § 14-10-129 notice and best-interests procedures. Later changes follow: A substantial change of circumstances and best interests are required for major modifications of decision-making or parenting time.
Parenting plans are filed early; mediation is often required. Child and Family Investigators may be appointed. Temporary parenting-time orders stabilize the case. Final allocation orders specify decision-making and a parenting-time calendar.
How custody cases typically move in Colorado
Parenting plans are filed early; mediation is often required. Child and Family Investigators may be appointed. Temporary parenting-time orders stabilize the case. Final allocation orders specify decision-making and a parenting-time calendar.
Related Colorado guides
Case law: custody and parenting time in Colorado
In Re the Marriage of Michelle A. CIESLUK, Petitioner, and Christopher J. Ciesluk, Respondent
…) the custodial parent had consented to the modification of custody to the non-custodial parent; (2) the child had been integrated into the non-eustodial parent’s family with the custodial parent’s consent; or (3) the child’s present environment endangered his physical health or significantly impaired his emotional development (“the endangerment standard”). Id. at 785. If no cr…
Colorado opinions such as In Re the Marriage of Michelle A. CIESLUK, Petitioner, and Christopher J. Ciesluk, Respondent are cited where child custody is disputed. The court stated: ") the custodial parent had consented to the modification of custody to the non-custodial parent; (2) the child had been integrated into the non-eustodial parent’s family with the custodial parent’s consent; or (3) the child’s present environment endangered his physical health or" That is the language to brief; the rest of the decision supplies the procedural posture.
L.A.G., Petitioner, v. the PEOPLE of the State of Colorado, Upon the Petition of the Denver County Department of
…Court in a dependency and neglect proceeding awarding joint custody of three minor children, A.A.G., L.T.G., and V.N.G., to the father, A.G., and to the mother, L.A.G. The juvenile court applied section 14-10-124(1) and (1.5), 6B C.R.S. (1987), of the Uniform Dissolution of Marriage Act (the Act) in rendering its decision. The court of appeals held that the juvenile court erred…
On child custody, L.A.G., Petitioner, v. the PEOPLE of the State of Colorado, Upon the Petition of the Denver County Department of speaks to the Colorado dispute in this passage: "Court in a dependency and neglect proceeding awarding joint custody of three minor children, A.A.G., L.T.G., and V.N.G., to the father, A.G., and to the mother, L.A.G. The juvenile court applied section 14-10-124(1) and (1.5), 6B C.R.S." The surrounding opinion shows how the court applied that language to the record.
In Re the MARRIAGE OF Joanna Krystyna FRANCIS, Now Known as Joanna Krystyna Chobot, Petitioner, and Steven G
…the facts in entering its order of July 5, 1993, concerning custody and visitation; in particular, and without limitation, did the trial court adopt and properly apply the correct legal standards in ordering a change of custody of the four younger children from sole custody in the mother to joint custody, including a change in residential custody, in the event the mother decide…
In Re the MARRIAGE OF Joanna Krystyna FRANCIS, Now Known as Joanna Krystyna Chobot, Petitioner, and Steven G is worth reading on Colorado child custody because the court put the point in its own words: "the facts in entering its order of July 5, 1993, concerning custody and visitation; in particular, and without limitation, did the trial court adopt and properly apply the correct legal standards in ordering a change of custody of the four younger children from sole custody in th" Use that passage as the starting point, then read the facts that precede it.
In Re the Parental Responsibilities of Randy REESE and Candice Reese, Petitioners-Appellees, and Adriana Henderson
…mong other cireum-stances, the child is not in the physical custody of a parent, or the petitioner has had physical care of the child for a period of six months or more and the petition is filed within six months after that care terminated. § 14-10-1283(1)(b)-(c), C.R.8.2009. "(This] statutory grant of standing to a non-parent to seek legal custody of a child constitutes legisl…
Colorado opinions such as In Re the Parental Responsibilities of Randy REESE and Candice Reese, Petitioners-Appellees, and Adriana Henderson are cited where child custody is disputed. The court stated: "mong other cireum-stances, the child is not in the physical custody of a parent, or the petitioner has had physical care of the child for a period of six months or more and the petition is filed within six months after that care terminated. § 14-10-1283(1)(b)-(c), C.R.8.2009. '(T" That is the language to brief; the rest of the decision supplies the procedural posture.
In re the Parental Responsibilities of M.J.K., R.A.K., M.K.D,, and Z.D.D., Children, Upon the Petition of Cheryl
…the context of this case violates her fundamental rights to custody, care, and management of her children. We disagree and therefore affirm. - - | *1108I. Background The record before us, albeit incomplete, reflects that grandmother originally assumed the care and custody of the children with mother's consent. Pursuant to uncontested orders, grandmother received guardianship of…
In re the Parental Responsibilities of M.J.K., R.A.K., M.K.D,, and Z.D.D., Children, Upon the Petition of Cheryl is worth reading on Colorado child custody because the court put the point in its own words: "We disagree and therefore affirm. - - | *1108I. Background The record before us, albeit incomplete, reflects that grandmother originally assumed the care and custody of the children with mother's consent." Use that passage as the starting point, then read the facts that precede it.
In Re the Marriage of Dennis L. CASIDA, Appellant, v. Louise M. CASIDA, Appellee
…edings, the parties executed a separation agreement placing custody of the minor child with the wife. The agreement contained no provisions respecting removal of the child from Colorado. On July 6, 1981, husband filed a verified motion petitioning the court to prohibit wife from leaving Colorado with the child “until further Order of the Court.” After a hearing on July 7, 1981,…
Colorado opinions such as In Re the Marriage of Dennis L. CASIDA, Appellant, v. Louise M. CASIDA, Appellee are cited where child custody is disputed. The court stated: "The agreement contained no provisions respecting removal of the child from Colorado. On July 6, 1981, husband filed a verified motion petitioning the court to prohibit wife from leaving Colorado with the child “until further Order of the Court." That is the language to brief; the rest of the decision supplies the procedural posture.
In re: in the Matter of R.M.S., a child
In re: in the Matter of R.M.S., a child, 2006 Colo. LEXIS 144 (2006)
…ury to the minor. The Villers, as persons with the care and custody of R.M.S., objected to the testamentary appointment and seek a new order appointing a guardian for R.M.S. pursuant to the best interest of the child standard. We issued a rule to show cause and now make the rule absolute. I. Facts and Proceedings On the afternoon of August 3, 2005, Larimer County law enforcemen…
On child custody, In re: in the Matter of R.M.S., a child speaks to the Colorado dispute in this passage: "The Villers, as persons with the care and custody of R.M.S., objected to the testamentary appointment and seek a new order appointing a guardian for R.M.S. pursuant to the best interest of the child standard. We issued a rule to show cause and now make the rule absolute. I." The surrounding opinion shows how the court applied that language to the record.
People Ex Rel. Ajc
People Ex Rel. Ajc, 88 P.3d 599 (2004)
…arental Responsibilities, despite the failed adoption. That custody determination, like all custody determinations, would be guided by the best interests of the child and a court would take evidence to that effect. What we consider here is whether, because the child was born in Missouri, spent two days of his life there and was the subject of a Missouri adoption proceeding, the…
Practitioners open People Ex Rel. Ajc when Colorado child custody turns on the distinction in this sentence: "Responsibilities, despite the failed adoption. That custody determination, like all custody determinations, would be guided by the best interests of the child and a court would take evidence to that effect." Do not lift it out of the facts the court was deciding.
Key takeaways
- Best-interests standard: Section 14-10-124 lists best-interests factors for allocating parental responsibilities, including the child’s wishes, parental wishes, relationships, adjustment, and domestic violence.
- Labels used in Colorado: Decision-making responsibility (legal) and parenting time (physical)..
- Parenting-time posture: No automatic equal parenting-time presumption; courts allocate responsibilities to serve the child’s best interests and encourage frequent contact when safe.
- Relocation: A parent with primary residence who seeks to relocate must follow § 14-10-129 notice and best-interests procedures.
- Modification: A substantial change of circumstances and best interests are required for major modifications of decision-making or parenting time.
- Primary authority: Colo. Rev. Stat. §§ 14-10-123 to 14-10-129.
Best-interests factors in Colorado
Section 14-10-124 lists best-interests factors for allocating parental responsibilities, including the child’s wishes, parental wishes, relationships, adjustment, and domestic violence.
Frequently asked questions
What does Colorado call “custody”?
Decision-making responsibility (legal) and parenting time (physical).
Can I move out of state with my child?
A parent with primary residence who seeks to relocate must follow § 14-10-129 notice and best-interests procedures.
How do I change an existing custody order in Colorado?
A substantial change of circumstances and best interests are required for major modifications of decision-making or parenting time.
This guide covers Colorado custody law as of 2026. Verify the live statute and any local parenting-time guidelines before relying on this summary.