Skip to main content

Colorow Health Care, LLC v. Fischer

Colo.June 11, 2018No. Supreme Court Case 16SC814Cited 7 times
RemandedFischer
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Judge(s)
Hood, Hart
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
appeal

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Excerpt

Health Care Availability Act—Statutory Construction—Alternative Dispute Resolution. CRS § 13-64-403 of the Health Care Availability Act governs arbitration agreements between patients and healthcare providers. Under CRS § 13-64-403(4), such agreements must contain a certain notice to patients to help ensure that they enter the agreements voluntarily, and the notice must be emphasized by at least 10-point font and bold-faced type. The agreement here contained the notice in 12-point font, but it was not bold-faced. The Court of Appeals determined the statute requires strict compliance and that the agreement therefore failed for lack of bold-faced type. The Supreme Court held that CRS § 13-64-403 requires only substantial compliance. The Court further concluded the agreement here substantially complied with the formatting requirements of CRS § 13-64-403, notwithstanding its lack of bold-faced type. Accordingly, the Court reversed the Court of Appeals' judgment and remanded the case for further proceedings consistent with the opinion.

What This Ruling Means

**What Happened** This case involved a dispute over an arbitration agreement between Colorow Health Care and a patient named Fischer. The healthcare company had patients sign agreements that would require them to resolve any disputes through arbitration (private dispute resolution) rather than going to court. However, there was a problem with how the agreement was formatted according to Colorado's Health Care Availability Act. **What the Court Decided** The court found that while Colorow's arbitration agreement included the required legal notice in 12-point font, it failed to make the text bold as required by state law. Colorado law specifically requires that certain notices in healthcare arbitration agreements must be in at least 10-point font AND bold-faced type to ensure patients understand what they're signing. Because the notice wasn't properly bolded, the court sent the case back to the lower court for further review. **Why This Matters for Workers** This ruling reinforces that employers and service providers must follow formatting requirements exactly when asking people to sign agreements that limit their legal rights. Even small details like font formatting can invalidate contracts that restrict workers' or patients' ability to sue in court, providing important protection for employees' legal rights.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.