Colorado's rule on how eviction works turns on a feature the national template does not capture: Colorado requires forcible entry and detainer (FED) in county court (or district court for higher-value claims) where the property is located. Nonpayment typically requires a 10-day demand for rent under § 13-40-104 (timelines were lengthened in recent reforms). Notices for substantial violations and no-fault terminations follow separate statutory periods, and local ordinances may add requirements. The controlling authority is Colo. Rev. Stat. §§ 13-40-104 to 13-40-123. After notice, the landlord files an FED complaint. The return date is often within one to two weeks; if the landlord prevails, a writ of restitution issues and the sheriff may execute after a short delay. Tenants can raise defenses and sometimes obtain limited stays for payment plans.
Key takeaways
- Process name: forcible entry and detainer (FED).
- Primary authority: Colo. Rev. Stat. §§ 13-40-104 to 13-40-123.
- Filing forum: county court (or district court for higher-value claims) where the property is located.
- Notice: Nonpayment typically requires a 10-day demand for rent under § 13-40-104 (timelines were lengthened in recent reforms).
- Self-help lockouts: Self-help lockouts and utility shutoffs are unlawful; possession must be recovered through FED judgment and writ.
Worked example under Colorado law
The illustration below uses only rules already stated for Colorado. It is a research hypothetical, not a prediction of what a court will do.
A residential landlord in Colorado wants possession after unpaid rent and cannot use a lockout.
- Give the notice Colorado actually requires: Nonpayment typically requires a 10-day demand for rent under § 13-40-104 (timelines were lengthened in recent reforms). Notices for substantial violations and no-fault terminations follow separate statutory periods, and local ordinances may add requirements.
- File forcible entry and detainer (FED) in county court (or district court for higher-value claims) where the property is located under Colo. Rev. Stat. §§ 13-40-104 to 13-40-123.
- Prove the tenancy, the ground, and proper notice. Tenant defenses include: Defenses include defective notice, warranty of habitability, retaliation, discrimination, and compliance with Colorado's rental application and fee statutes.
- If the landlord prevails, possession is enforced by writ — Self-help lockouts and utility shutoffs are unlawful; possession must be recovered through FED judgment and writ.
After notice, the landlord files an FED complaint. The return date is often within one to two weeks; if the landlord prevails, a writ of restitution issues and the sheriff may execute after a short delay. Tenants can raise defenses and sometimes obtain limited stays for payment plans.
The Colorado eviction / forcible entry and detainer (FED) framework
After notice, the landlord files an FED complaint. The return date is often within one to two weeks; if the landlord prevails, a writ of restitution issues and the sheriff may execute after a short delay. Tenants can raise defenses and sometimes obtain limited stays for payment plans.
Exact deadlines vary by county practice, service method, and whether the tenant answers. Commercial leases and subsidized housing can add federal or program-specific rules on top of Colorado law.
Notice requirements before filing
Nonpayment typically requires a 10-day demand for rent under § 13-40-104 (timelines were lengthened in recent reforms). Notices for substantial violations and no-fault terminations follow separate statutory periods, and local ordinances may add requirements.
A defective notice is one of the most common reasons an eviction is dismissed without prejudice. Landlords should match the notice form and timing to the ground for eviction (nonpayment vs. cureable breach vs. no-cause termination where allowed). Tenants should keep the envelope, text, email, and posting photos.
Where the case is filed
Eviction actions in Colorado are filed in county court (or district court for higher-value claims) where the property is located. Service must follow Colorado rules — personal service, substitute service, or posting/mailing combinations as authorized. Improper service can void a default judgment.
Hearing, judgment, and writ of possession
After service, the tenant usually has a short window to answer. At hearing the landlord must prove the landlord-tenant relationship, the ground for eviction, proper notice, and (for nonpayment) the rent due. If the landlord prevails, the court issues a judgment for possession and, after any statutory waiting period, a writ of possession executed by the sheriff or constable — not by the landlord personally.
Tenant defenses in Colorado
Defenses include defective notice, warranty of habitability, retaliation, discrimination, and compliance with Colorado's rental application and fee statutes.
Habitability, retaliation, and discrimination defenses can convert a simple nonpayment case into a longer civil action. Tenants asserting habitability should document repair requests; landlords facing those defenses should document inspections and cure efforts.
Self-help is not a shortcut
Self-help lockouts and utility shutoffs are unlawful; possession must be recovered through FED judgment and writ.
Illegal lockouts can expose landlords to statutory damages, attorney's fees, and even criminal penalties in some jurisdictions. The lawful path is notice → forcible entry and detainer (FED) → writ.
Practical tips
- Calendar every notice and answer deadline; eviction timelines are intentionally short.
- Bring the lease, ledger, notices, and proof of service to the first hearing.
- Search Colorado opinions for “forcible entry and detainer (FED)”, “writ of possession”, and “notice to quit” on LawDiver before a contested trial.
- Subsidized, mobile-home, and hotel-to-housing arrangements may follow different notice statutes — verify the housing type.
Case law: eviction and landlord-tenant in Colorado
J. “Al” HURRICANE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. KANOVER, LTD., Defendant-Appellee
…81 Supp.). Hurricane did not leave, so Kanover commenced an unlawful detainer action in Arapahoe County Court under the forcible entry and detainer statute to obtain possession. See section 13-40-101 to -123, C.R.S.1973 (1981 Supp.). Shortly thereafter, Hurricane brought suit against Kanover in Arapahoe County District Court, alleging that Kanover attempted to increase Hurrican…
Practitioners open J. “Al” HURRICANE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. KANOVER, LTD., Defendant-Appellee when Colorado eviction / landlord-tenant turns on the distinction in this sentence: "Supp.). Hurricane did not leave, so Kanover commenced an unlawful detainer action in Arapahoe County Court under the forcible entry and detainer statute to obtain possession. See section 13-40-101 to -123, C.R.S.1973 (1981 Supp.)." Do not lift it out of the facts the court was deciding.
Barlow Et Al. v. Hoffman Et Al.
Barlow Et Al. v. Hoffman Et Al., 86 P.2d 239 (1938)
…f the premises. The agent thereupon instituted an action of unlawful detainer. This action for some reason was dismissed, without prejudice, months after its commencement. It does not appear that the dismissal was due to any mistake of law or of fact on the part of the lessor. The complaint in that proceeding had alleged the demand and the election to terminate the tenancy. "Wh…
On eviction / landlord-tenant, Barlow Et Al. v. Hoffman Et Al. speaks to the Colorado dispute in this passage: "The agent thereupon instituted an action of unlawful detainer. This action for some reason was dismissed, without prejudice, months after its commencement. It does not appear that the dismissal was due to any mistake of law or of fact on the part of the lessor." The surrounding opinion shows how the court applied that language to the record.
Hepp Wall Paper & Mercantile Co. v. Deahl
Hepp Wall Paper & Mercantile Co. v. Deahl, 53 Colo. 274 (1912)
…e. The lessee, refusing to surrender possession, a suit for unlawful detainer was instituted on August 15, 1910, by the lessor against the lessee, resulting-in judgment in favor of the former, to which the latter prosecutes this writ of error. Plaintiff in error contends: (1) That the notice served by the lessor upon the lessee is insufficient under the unlawful detainer act; (…
On eviction / landlord-tenant, Hepp Wall Paper & Mercantile Co. v. Deahl speaks to the Colorado dispute in this passage: "The lessee, refusing to surrender possession, a suit for unlawful detainer was instituted on August 15, 1910, by the lessor against the lessee, resulting-in judgment in favor of the former, to which the latter prosecutes this writ of error." The surrounding opinion shows how the court applied that language to the record.
Hewitt v. Landis
Hewitt v. Landis, 75 Colo. 277 (1924)
…district court by the landlord under the forcible entry and unlawful detainer act for having violated the lease. Upon final hearing, judgment went against the tenant commanding him to *278surrender possession of the premises. Thereupon he sued out a writ of error in the Supreme Court to review that., judgment and made application for a writ of supersedeas pending review. At, or…
On eviction / landlord-tenant, Hewitt v. Landis speaks to the Colorado dispute in this passage: "Upon final hearing, judgment went against the tenant commanding him to *278surrender possession of the premises. Thereupon he sued out a writ of error in the Supreme Court to review that., judgment and made application for a writ of supersedeas pending review." The surrounding opinion shows how the court applied that language to the record.
Burness R. Hix v. Leonard A. Roy
Burness R. Hix v. Leonard A. Roy, 139 Colo. 457 (1959)
…77, it has been the law in this state that in an action for unlawful detainer the plaintiff to recover must aver and prove a demand in writing for possession of the premises as required by the statute, C.R.S. ’53, 58-1-1 to 58-1-26. In this instance the demand was defective in that (a) it did not unequivocably terminate the lease pursuant to the terms thereof; (b) suit was brou…
Colorado opinions such as Burness R. Hix v. Leonard A. Roy are cited where eviction / landlord-tenant is disputed. The court stated: "77, it has been the law in this state that in an action for unlawful detainer the plaintiff to recover must aver and prove a demand in writing for possession of the premises as required by the statute, C.R.S. ’53, 58-1-1 to 58-1-26. In this instance the demand was defective in th" That is the language to brief; the rest of the decision supplies the procedural posture.
Reitze v. Humphreys
Reitze v. Humphreys, 53 Colo. 171 (1912)
…to review a judgment of the district court in an action of unlawful detainer, which was begun before a justice of the peace. It involves the same property and in fact the same transaction and parties as Case No. 6588, (Post 177) which has just been determined. For convenience, we will refer to the case last mentioned as the equity suit, and the other as unlawful detainer. The…
On eviction / landlord-tenant, Reitze v. Humphreys speaks to the Colorado dispute in this passage: "It involves the same property and in fact the same transaction and parties as Case No. 6588, (Post 177) which has just been determined. For convenience, we will refer to the case last mentioned as the equity suit, and the other as unlawful detainer." The surrounding opinion shows how the court applied that language to the record.
ROBERT A. McNEIL CORPORATION, D/B/A Arapahoe Plaza East, and Arapahoe Plaza Associates, Ltd., Plaintiffs-Appellants
…t to this agreement. Consequently, a writ of restitution in unlawful detainer was entered in the action and tenant was forcibly evicted on April 4, 1984. Landlords brought this action against guarantors to recover back rent and future rent due through the remainder of the term of the lease. Guarantors answered, in part, that the F.E.D. action had voided the lease and restored p…
ROBERT A. McNEIL CORPORATION, D/B/A Arapahoe Plaza East, and Arapahoe Plaza Associates, Ltd., Plaintiffs-Appellants is worth reading on Colorado eviction / landlord-tenant because the court put the point in its own words: "Consequently, a writ of restitution in unlawful detainer was entered in the action and tenant was forcibly evicted on April 4, 1984. Landlords brought this action against guarantors to recover back rent and future rent due through the remainder of the term of the lease." Use that passage as the starting point, then read the facts that precede it.
General American Industries, Inc. v. County Court of Clear Creek County, Et Al.
General American Industries, Inc. v. County Court of Clear Creek County, Et Al., 136 Colo. 86 (1957)
…justice *88of the peace to the County Court in an action of unlawful detainer. Certain mining claims were the subject of the unlawful detainer action. It was alleged that the tenant retained possession after breach of certain covenants contained in the lease , and notice demanding possession of the property. Judgment was entered by the Justice of the Peace in favor of the plain…
General American Industries, Inc. v. County Court of Clear Creek County, Et Al. is worth reading on Colorado eviction / landlord-tenant because the court put the point in its own words: "County Court in an action of unlawful detainer. Certain mining claims were the subject of the unlawful detainer action. It was alleged that the tenant retained possession after breach of certain covenants contained in the lease , and notice demanding possession of the property." Use that passage as the starting point, then read the facts that precede it.
Frequently asked questions
How does eviction work in Colorado?
Colorado uses forcible entry and detainer (FED) under Colo. Rev. Stat. §§ 13-40-104 to 13-40-123. After notice, the landlord files an FED complaint.
How much notice does a landlord have to give?
Nonpayment typically requires a 10-day demand for rent under § 13-40-104 (timelines were lengthened in recent reforms). Notices for substantial violations and no-fault terminations follow separate statutory periods, and local ordinances may add requirements.
Can a landlord change the locks without going to court?
Self-help lockouts and utility shutoffs are unlawful; possession must be recovered through FED judgment and writ.
What defenses can a tenant raise?
Defenses include defective notice, warranty of habitability, retaliation, discrimination, and compliance with Colorado's rental application and fee statutes.