Case Law Lobato v. State

Lobato v. State

Document Cited Authorities (48) Cited in (81) Related

Alexander Halpern LLC, Alexander Halpern, Michelle Murphy, Jennifer Albert Morgan, Kathleen J. Gebhardt LLC, Kathleen J. Gebhardt, Boulder, Colorado, Attorneys for Petitioners.

John W. Suthers, Attorney General, Daniel D. Domenico, Solicitor General, Antony B. Dyl, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Carey Taylor Markel, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Denver, Colorado, Attorneys for Respondents.

Kutz & Bethke LLC, William P. Bethke, Lakewood, Colorado, Attorneys for Amicus Curiae Colorado League of Charter Schools.

Colorado Association of School Boards, Kathleen Sullivan, Denver, Colorado, Attorneys for Amici Curiae Colorado Association of School Boards and Colorado Association of School Executives.

Colorado Education Association, Martha R. Houser, Bradley C. Bartels, Denver, Colorado, Attorneys for Amicus Curiae Colorado Education Association.

Kelly Garnsey Hubbell ± Lass LLC, Martha M. Tierney, Denver, Colorado, Attorneys for Amicus Curiae Education Justice at Education Law Center.

Morrison & Foerster LLP, Steven M. Kaufmann, Osman E. Nawaz, Denver, Colorado, Colorado Center on Law and Policy, Edwin S. Kahn, Special Counsel Denver, Colorado, Attorneys for Amici Curiae Colorado Lawyers Committee and the Colorado Center on Law and Policy.

Davis Graham & Stubbs LLP, Kenzo S. Kawanabe, Terry R. Miller, Denver, Colorado, Attorneys for Amicus Curiae Great Education Colorado.

Maldef, David G. Hinojosa, Nina Perales, San Antonio, Texas, Holme, Roberts & Owen, LLP, Manuel L. Martinez, Denver, Colorado, Attorneys for Amici Curiae Padres Unidos, and the Multicultural Education, Training & Advocacy, Inc.

Justice BENDER delivered the Opinion of the Court.

I. Introduction

In this appeal, we review the court of appeals' decision that the plaintiff school districts lack standing to sue the state, and that plaintiff parents, who challenge the adequacy of our public school funding system under the education clause of the Colorado Constitution, presented a nonjusticiable political question. Lobato v. State, 216 P.3d 29 (Colo. App.2008). We reverse the court of appeals' holdings that the plaintiff school districts lack standing to sue the state and that the plaintiffs have alleged a nonjusticiable claim.

Plaintiffs are composed of two groups. The first group consists of parents from eight school districts across the state acting in their individual capacities and on behalf of their school age children ("plaintiff parents"). The second group consists of fourteen school districts in the San Luis Valley ("plaintiff school districts"). Plaintiffs brought suit against the State of Colorado, the Colorado State Board of Education, the Commissioner of Education, and the Governor (collectively "state defendants"), alleging constitutional deficiencies in Colorado's public school financing system. Plaintiffs claim that the system, because it is underfunded and allocates funds on an irrational and arbitrary basis, violates the education clause's mandate that the General Assembly provide a "thorough and uniform" system of public education. See Colo. Const. art. IX, § 2. Plaintiffs further claim that the local school districts have standing to challenge the adequacy of the state's public school financing system because severe underfunding and irrational disbursement of funds undermine the districts' interest in local control over educational instruction and quality. See Colo. Const. art. IX, § 15.

Without taking evidence, the trial court held that plaintiff school districts lacked standing to bring their claims, but did not address the standing of the plaintiff parents. The trial court also dismissed the plaintiffs' complaint for failure to state a claim. The court of appeals affirmed the district court's holding that plaintiff school districts lacked standing, but held that plaintiff parents did have standing. Lobato v. State, 216 P.3d at 34-35. The court of appeals also affirmed the dismissal of plaintiff's complaint for failure to state a claim. Lobato v. State, 216 P.3d at 35-42.

The plaintiff school districts appeal their dismissal for lack of standing. Additionally, both the plaintiff parents and the plaintiff school districts appeal the holding that their claims present a nonjusticiable political question. Because this case was dismissed before either side presented evidence, our precedent requires that we accept the plaintiffs' factual allegations as true.

As a threshold matter, we examine whether the court of appeals should have addressed the school districts' standing. Because none of the parties contest that the plaintiff parents possess standing, we hold that it was unnecessary for the court of appeals to decide this issue, and reverse the court of appeals on this issue.

Next, we examine whether the plaintiffs present a justiciable claim for relief. The education clause, article IX, section 2 of the Colorado Constitution, states in relevant part that "the general assembly shall . . . provide for the establishment and maintenance of a thorough and uniform system of...

5 cases
Document | Colorado Court of Appeals – 2012
Freedom from Religion Found., Inc. v. Hickenlooper
"...People, 198 P.3d 108, 111 (Colo.2008), and an allegation that a plaintiff does not have standing raises such a challenge, Lobato v. State, 218 P.3d 358, 368 (Colo.2009).¶ 41 The Governor contends on appeal that we should not reach the merits because FFRF and the taxpayers do not have standi..."
Document | Court of Chancery of Delaware – 2018
Delawareans for Educ. Opportunity v. Carney
"...Minnesota, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Texas, and Wyoming. See Lake View , 91 S.W.3d at 482–85 ; Lobato v. State (Lobato II) , 218 P.3d 358, 374 (Colo. 2009) (en banc ); Idaho Schools I , 850 P.2d at 734 ; Rose , 790 S.W.2d at 209 ; Cruz-Guzman , 916 N.W.2d at 10 ; DeRolph , 677 N.E.2..."
Document | Florida Supreme Court – 2019
Citizens for Strong Sch., Inc. v. Fla. State Bd. of Educ.
"...constitutional terms, it is appropriate to utilize dictionary definitions. See Apportionment I , 83 So.3d at 632 ; see also, e.g. , Lobato , 218 P.3d at 375 ; Davis , 804 N.W.2d at 624. "Uniform" is defined as "having always the same form, manner, or degree: not varying or variable" or "con..."
Document | Connecticut Supreme Court – 2010
Connecticut Coalition for Justice v. Rell
"...of plurality opinion; but I find persuasive the statement of the court in Lobato v. State, 216 P.3d 29, 36 (Colo.App.2008), rev'd, 218 P.3d 358 (Colo.2009), that these disparate results are not based on any clearly discernible legal principles, but "revolve around policy choices and value d..."
Document | Colorado Court of Appeals – 2013
Taxpayers for Pub. Educ. v. Douglas Cnty. Sch. Dist.
"...the court did not address standing. Likewise, the plaintiffs' claims in both Lobato v. State, 216 P.3d 29 (Colo.App.2008), rev'd, 218 P.3d 358 (Colo.2009), and Boulder Valley Sch. Dist. RE – 2 v. Colo. State Bd. of Educ., 217 P.3d 918 (Colo.App.2009), alleged violations of the state constit..."

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial
2 books and journal articles
Document | Vol. 75 Núm. 4, June - June 2012 – 2012
Safeguarding the right to a sound basic education in times of fiscal constraint.
"...P.2d 806, 816 (Ariz. 1994); Lake View Sch. Dist. No. 25 of Phillips Cnty. v. Huckabee, 91 S.W.3d 472, 477 (Ark. 2002); Lobato v. State, 218 P.3d 358, 362 (Colo. 2009); Conn. Coal. for Justice in Educ. Funding, Inc. v. Rell, 990 A.2d 206, 206 (Conn. 2010); Idaho Sch. for Equal Educ. Opportun..."
Document | Vol. 97 Núm. 3, March 2022 – 2022
STARE DECISIS AND INTERSYSTEMIC ADJUDICATION.
"...(plurality opinion). See, e.g., Neb. Coal. for Educ. Equity & Adequacy v. Heineman, 731 N.W.2d 164, 176 (Neb. 2007); Lobato v. State, 218 P.3d 358, 377 (Colo. 2009) (en banc); Wilson v. Fallin, 262 P.3d 741, 749 (Okla. (95) Commonwealth v. Thomas, 507 A.2d 57, 60-61 (Pa. 1986) (applying..."

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial

Experience vLex's unparalleled legal AI

Access millions of documents and let Vincent AI power your research, drafting, and document analysis — all in one platform.

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
2 books and journal articles
Document | Vol. 75 Núm. 4, June - June 2012 – 2012
Safeguarding the right to a sound basic education in times of fiscal constraint.
"...P.2d 806, 816 (Ariz. 1994); Lake View Sch. Dist. No. 25 of Phillips Cnty. v. Huckabee, 91 S.W.3d 472, 477 (Ark. 2002); Lobato v. State, 218 P.3d 358, 362 (Colo. 2009); Conn. Coal. for Justice in Educ. Funding, Inc. v. Rell, 990 A.2d 206, 206 (Conn. 2010); Idaho Sch. for Equal Educ. Opportun..."
Document | Vol. 97 Núm. 3, March 2022 – 2022
STARE DECISIS AND INTERSYSTEMIC ADJUDICATION.
"...(plurality opinion). See, e.g., Neb. Coal. for Educ. Equity & Adequacy v. Heineman, 731 N.W.2d 164, 176 (Neb. 2007); Lobato v. State, 218 P.3d 358, 377 (Colo. 2009) (en banc); Wilson v. Fallin, 262 P.3d 741, 749 (Okla. (95) Commonwealth v. Thomas, 507 A.2d 57, 60-61 (Pa. 1986) (applying..."

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
5 cases
Document | Colorado Court of Appeals – 2012
Freedom from Religion Found., Inc. v. Hickenlooper
"...People, 198 P.3d 108, 111 (Colo.2008), and an allegation that a plaintiff does not have standing raises such a challenge, Lobato v. State, 218 P.3d 358, 368 (Colo.2009).¶ 41 The Governor contends on appeal that we should not reach the merits because FFRF and the taxpayers do not have standi..."
Document | Court of Chancery of Delaware – 2018
Delawareans for Educ. Opportunity v. Carney
"...Minnesota, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Texas, and Wyoming. See Lake View , 91 S.W.3d at 482–85 ; Lobato v. State (Lobato II) , 218 P.3d 358, 374 (Colo. 2009) (en banc ); Idaho Schools I , 850 P.2d at 734 ; Rose , 790 S.W.2d at 209 ; Cruz-Guzman , 916 N.W.2d at 10 ; DeRolph , 677 N.E.2..."
Document | Florida Supreme Court – 2019
Citizens for Strong Sch., Inc. v. Fla. State Bd. of Educ.
"...constitutional terms, it is appropriate to utilize dictionary definitions. See Apportionment I , 83 So.3d at 632 ; see also, e.g. , Lobato , 218 P.3d at 375 ; Davis , 804 N.W.2d at 624. "Uniform" is defined as "having always the same form, manner, or degree: not varying or variable" or "con..."
Document | Connecticut Supreme Court – 2010
Connecticut Coalition for Justice v. Rell
"...of plurality opinion; but I find persuasive the statement of the court in Lobato v. State, 216 P.3d 29, 36 (Colo.App.2008), rev'd, 218 P.3d 358 (Colo.2009), that these disparate results are not based on any clearly discernible legal principles, but "revolve around policy choices and value d..."
Document | Colorado Court of Appeals – 2013
Taxpayers for Pub. Educ. v. Douglas Cnty. Sch. Dist.
"...the court did not address standing. Likewise, the plaintiffs' claims in both Lobato v. State, 216 P.3d 29 (Colo.App.2008), rev'd, 218 P.3d 358 (Colo.2009), and Boulder Valley Sch. Dist. RE – 2 v. Colo. State Bd. of Educ., 217 P.3d 918 (Colo.App.2009), alleged violations of the state constit..."

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex