Mark Reaman, in his capacity as editor of the Crested Butte News/Cross-Respondent v. Andrew Brookhart, in his official capacity as the executive director and custodian of records of the Gunnison County Library District. Respondent/Cross-Petitioner (Colo. 2024)

Opinion

1

Mark Reaman, in his capacity as editor of the Crested Butte News, Petitioner/Cross-Respondent
v.
Andrew Brookhart, in his official capacity as the executive director and custodian of records of the Gunnison County Library District. Respondent/Cross-Petitioner

No. 23SC823

Supreme Court of Colorado, En Banc

July 22, 2024

Court of Appeals Case No. 22CA1119

Petition and Cross-Petition for Writ of Certiorari DENIED.

CHIEF JUSTICE BOATRIGHT would grant as to the following issues:

Whether the Colorado court of appeals erred as a matter of law when it concluded that individuals who submitted Request for Reconsideration Forms to a library meet the definition of a "user" of a library "service" as defined in section 24-72-204(3)(a)(VII), C.R.S. (2023), and section 24-90-119, C.R.S (2023).

Whether the Colorado court of appeals erred as a matter of law in holding that identifying information of a person who submits a Request for Reconsideration Form to a library must be redacted from the form if it is produced under section 24-72-204(3)(a)(VII), C.R.S. (2023), because the member of the public qualifies as a library "user," as such term is employed in that statute and section 24-90-119, C.R.S. (2023).

Whether the court of appeals erred as a matter of law in applying the rules of statutory construction by ignoring the plain meaning of and legislative intent for section 24-72-204(3)(a)(VII), C.R.S. (2023), and section 24-90-119, C.R.S. (2023), and instead construed these statutes in a manner that engrafts an overly broad, impracticable, and absurd construction that the Colorado General Assembly could not have intended.

Opinion

1

Mark Reaman, in his capacity as editor of the Crested Butte News, Petitioner/Cross-Respondent v. Andrew Brookhart, in his official capacity as the executive director and custodian of records of the Gunnison County Library District. Respondent/Cross-Petitioner

No. 23SC823

Supreme Court of Colorado, En Banc

July 22, 2024

Court of Appeals Case No. 22CA1119

Petition and Cross-Petition for Writ of Certiorari DENIED.

CHIEF JUSTICE BOATRIGHT would grant as to the following issues:

Whether the Colorado court of appeals erred as a matter of law when it concluded that individuals who submitted Request for Reconsideration Forms to a library meet the definition of a "user" of a library "service" as defined in section 24-72-204(3)(a)(VII), C.R.S. (2023), and section 24-90-119, C.R.S (2023).

Whether the Colorado court of appeals erred as a matter of law in holding that identifying information of a person who submits a Request for Reconsideration Form to a library must be redacted from the form if it is produced under section 24-72-204(3)(a)(VII), C.R.S. (2023), because the member of the public qualifies as a library "user," as such term is employed in that statute and section 24-90-119, C.R.S. (2023).

Whether the court of appeals erred as a matter of law in applying the rules of statutory construction by ignoring the plain meaning of and legislative intent for section 24-72-204(3)(a)(VII), C.R.S. (2023), and section 24-90-119, C.R.S. (2023), and instead construed these statutes in a manner that engrafts an overly broad, impracticable, and absurd construction that the Colorado General Assembly could not have intended.

Opinion

1

Mark Reaman, in his capacity as editor of the Crested Butte News, Petitioner/Cross-Respondent
v.
Andrew Brookhart, in his official capacity as the executive director and custodian of records of the Gunnison County Library District. Respondent/Cross-Petitioner

No. 23SC823

Supreme Court of Colorado, En Banc

July 22, 2024

Court of Appeals Case No. 22CA1119

Petition and Cross-Petition for Writ of Certiorari DENIED.

CHIEF JUSTICE BOATRIGHT would grant as to the following issues:

Whether the Colorado court of appeals erred as a matter of law when it concluded that individuals who submitted Request for Reconsideration Forms to a library meet the definition of a "user" of a library "service" as defined in section 24-72-204(3)(a)(VII), C.R.S. (2023), and section 24-90-119, C.R.S (2023).

Whether the Colorado court of appeals erred as a matter of law in holding that identifying information of a person who submits a Request for Reconsideration Form to a library must be redacted from the form if it is produced under section 24-72-204(3)(a)(VII), C.R.S. (2023), because the member of the public qualifies as a library "user," as such term is employed in that statute and section 24-90-119, C.R.S. (2023).

Whether the court of appeals erred as a matter of law in applying the rules of statutory construction by ignoring the plain meaning of and legislative intent for section 24-72-204(3)(a)(VII), C.R.S. (2023), and section 24-90-119, C.R.S. (2023), and instead construed these statutes in a manner that engrafts an overly broad, impracticable, and absurd construction that the Colorado General Assembly could not have intended.