Adams v. Sagee

Excerpt

Plaintiffs petitioned to present a ballot initiative to the residents of Sheridan. Sheridan's City Clerk, Sagee, rejected some of the signatures plaintiffs had collected, leaving them short of the number required for the initiative to be considered. Plaintiffs contested the decision, and the City Clerk upheld it after a protest hearing. Plaintiffs filed a complaint in district court 35 days later pursuant to CRS § 31-11-110(3). The district court dismissed the case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because plaintiffs failed to file within the CRCP 106 28-day time limit. On appeal, plaintiffs conceded that the 28-day jurisdictional bar applied and they filed 35 days after the relevant final decision. They argued that strict application of the time limit to them as pro se parties deprived them of their constitutional right of initiative. The Court of Appeals construed plaintiffs' argument to be an as-applied challenge to the constitutionality of the statutory time bar. The Court found plaintiffs pro se status irrelevant pro se parties must comply with procedural rules to the same extent as parties represented by attorneys. The Court concluded that applying CRCP 106(b)'s jurisdictional deadline to plaintiffs' Rule 106(a)(4) petition does not deprive them of or unduly burden their constitutional right of initiative. The judgment was affirmed.