(1) (a) The general assembly hereby finds, determines, and declares it is the public policy of this state that:
(I) Children of this state should have the maximum opportunity to participate in sporting, recreational, educational, and other activities where certain risks may exist;
(II) Public, private, and non-profit entities providing these essential activities to children in Colorado need a measure of protection against lawsuits, and without the measure of protection these entities may be unwilling or unable to provide the activities;
(III) Parents have a fundamental right and responsibility to make decisions concerning the care, custody, and control of their children. The law has long presumed that parents act in the best interest of their children.
(IV) Parents make conscious choices every day on behalf of their children concerning the risks and benefits of participation in activities that may involve risk;
(V) These are proper parental choices on behalf of children that should not be ignored. So long as the decision is voluntary and informed, the decision should be given the same dignity as decisions regarding schooling, medical treatment, and religious education; and
(VI) It is the intent of the general assembly to encourage the affordability and availability of youth activities in this state by permitting a parent of a child to release a prospective negligence claim of the child against certain persons and entities involved in providing the opportunity to participate in the activities.
(b) The general assembly further declares that the Colorado supreme court's holding in case number 00SC885, 48 P.3d 1229 (Colo. 2002), has not been adopted by the general assembly and does not reflect the intent of the general assembly or the public policy of this state.
(2) As used in this section, unless the context otherwise requires:
(a) "Child" means a person under eighteen years of age.
(b) For purposes of this section only, "parent" means a parent, as defined in section 19-1-103 (82), C.R.S., a person who has guardianship of the person, as defined in section 19-1-103 (60), C.R.S., a person who has legal custody, as defined in section 19-1-103 (73), C.R.S., a legal representative, as defined in section 19-1-103 (73.5), C.R.S., a physical custodian, as defined in section 19-1-103 (84), C.R.S., or a responsible person, as defined in section 19-1-103 (94), C.R.S.
(3) A parent of a child may, on behalf of the child, release or waive the child's prospective claim for negligence.
(4) Nothing in this section shall be construed to permit a parent acting on behalf of his or her child to waive the child's prospective claim against a person or entity for a willful and wanton act or omission, a reckless act or omission, or a grossly negligent act or omission.
Source: L. 2003: Entire section added, p. 1721, 1, effective May 14.
Law reviews. For article, "Recreational Waivers in Colorado: Playing at Your Own Risk", see 32 Colo. Law. 77 (Aug. 2003).
Section may not be applied retrospectively to cause of action accruing prior to its effective date. Absent express legislative intent to the contrary, a statute is presumed to apply only prospectively. Pollock v. Highlands Ranch Cmty. Ass'n, 140 P.3d 351 (Colo. App. 2006).
Decision to release child's prospective claims voluntary and informed. When mother releasor signed release, she had sufficient information to assess the degree of risk and the extent of possible injuries from any activity and to make an informed decision to release any claims. Squires v. Goodwin, 829 F. Supp. 2d 1062 (D. Colo. 2011), aff'd, 715 F.3d 867 (10th Cir. 2013).
Release legally valid. The release met four criteria: (1) There was no obvious disparity in bargaining power between releasor and releasee; (2) the agreement set forth the parties' intentions in clear and unambiguous language; (3) the circumstances and the nature of the service indicated that the agreement was fairly entered into; and (4) the agreement did not violate public policy. Squires v. Goodwin, 829 F. Supp. 2d 1062 (D. Colo. 2011), aff'd, 715 F.3d 867 (10th Cir. 2013).
Where registration form made no reference to the relevant activity or to waiving personal injury claims, the form is legally insufficient to release plaintiff's personal injury claims. Wycoff v. Grace Cmty. Church, 251 P.3d 1260 (Colo. App. 2010).
Applied in Hamill v. Cheley Colo. Camps, Inc., 262 P.3d 945 (Colo. App. 2011).
Editor's note: This part 2 was added in 1975. This part 2 was repealed and reenacted in 2004, resulting in the addition, relocation, and elimination of sections as well as subject matter. For amendments to this part 2 prior to 2004, consult the Colorado statutory research explanatory note and the table itemizing the replacement volumes and supplements to the original volume of C.R.S. 1973 beginning on page vii in the front of this volume. Former C.R.S. section numbers are shown in editors' notes following those sections that were relocated.
Cross references: For the employment of the procedures in this part 2 to disputes arising under written agreements between employers and employees, see 8-1-123.
Law reviews: For article, "Enforcement of Arbitration Awards in Colorado", see 14 Colo. Law. 535 (1985); for article, "New Avenues for the Domestic Relations Practitioner", see 14 Colo. Law. 998 (1985); for article, "Avoiding Arbitration in Complex Construction Litigation", see 15 Colo. Law. 1808 (1986); for a discussion of Tenth Circuit decisions dealing with arbitration, see 66 Den. U.L. Rev. 675 (1989); for numerous articles dealing with alternative dispute resolution (ADR), see 18 Colo. Law. 828-928 (1989); for articles "The Power of Arbitrators and Courts to Order Discovery in Arbitration" parts I and II, see 25 Colo. Law. 55 (Feb. 1996) and 25 Colo. Law. 35 (March 1996); for article, "Alternative Dispute Resolution in Colorado", see 28 Colo. Law. 67 (Sept. 1999); for article, "Colorado's Revised Uniform Arbitration Act", see 33 Colo. Law. 11 (Sept. 2004); for article, "A Three-Year Survey of Colorado Appellate Decisions on Arbitration Part I", see 34 Colo. Law. 41 (Feb. 2005); for article, "A Three-Year Survey of Colorado Appellate Decisions on Arbitration Part II", see 34 Colo. Law. 47 (March 2005); for article, "Arbitrator and Mediator Disclosure Obligations in Colorado", see 34 Colo. Law. 53 (Sept. 2005); for article, "The State of the Intertwining Doctrine in Colorado", see 36 Colo. Law. 15 (Jan. 2007); for article, "Demise of the Intertwining Doctrine in Colorado", see 37 Colo. Law. 21 (Jan. 2008); for article, "Arbitration Clauses", see 43 Colo. Law. 59 (Aug. 2014); for article, "Application of the Federal Arbitration Act in State Court Proceedings", see 43 Colo. Law. 33 (Dec. 2014); for article, "Construction Defect Municipal Ordinances: The Balkanization of Tort and Contract Law (Part 3)", see 46 Colo. Law. 27 (Apr. 2017); for article, "When is an "Arbitration" not an Arbitration?", see 46 Colo. Law. 29 (Oct. 2017); for article, "Effective Advocacy in Arbitration", see 47 Colo. Law. 26 (Apr. 2018).