Colorado Certificate of Review (Medical Malpractice)

COLORADO CERTIFICATE OF REVIEW

Table of Contents

1. Court Caption
2. Statutory Basis
3. Attorney's Certifications
4. Expert Consultation Statement
5. Expert Qualifications Statement (C.R.S. § 13-64-401)
6. Materials Reviewed by Expert
7. Conclusion of Substantial Justification
8. Multiple Defendants — Separate Certifications
9. Reservation Regarding Expert Identity
10. Verification
11. Signature Block
12. Certificate of Service
13. Practice Notes — Timing, Extensions, and Consequences
14. Sources and References

1. Court Caption

DISTRICT COURT, [COUNTY] COUNTY, COLORADO

Court Address: [____________________________]

CERTIFICATE OF REVIEW PURSUANT TO C.R.S. § 13-20-602

2. Statutory Basis

The undersigned, [ATTORNEY NAME], counsel of record for Plaintiff(s) in the above-captioned action, hereby files this Certificate of Review pursuant to C.R.S. § 13-20-602, which requires that:

"In every action for damages or indemnity based upon the alleged professional negligence of … a licensed professional, the plaintiff's or complainant's attorney shall file with the court a certificate of review for each licensed professional named as a party … within sixty days after the service of the complaint, counterclaim, or cross claim against such person unless the court determines that a longer period is necessary for good cause shown."

This Certificate is timely filed within sixty (60) days of service of the Complaint, the operative dates of which are set forth below:

3. Attorney's Certifications

I, [ATTORNEY NAME], hereby certify, in my capacity as counsel of record for Plaintiff(s), and pursuant to C.R.S. § 13-20-602(3), as follows:

☐ (a) Consultation. I have consulted with one or more persons (each a "Consulting Expert") who possess expertise in the area or areas of the alleged negligent conduct of each Defendant identified in the Complaint as a licensed professional, regarding the merits of the claims asserted against each such Defendant.

☐ (b) Expert Qualifications. Each Consulting Expert is, with respect to physician Defendants, qualified to testify as an expert witness under C.R.S. § 13-64-401, and, with respect to any other licensed professional Defendants, can demonstrate by competent evidence that, as a result of training, education, knowledge, and experience, the Consulting Expert is competent to express an opinion as to the negligent conduct alleged.

☐ (c) Review of Facts. Each Consulting Expert has reviewed the known facts, including such records, documents, and other materials as the Consulting Expert deemed relevant to the alleged negligent conduct (the materials reviewed are summarized in Section 6 below).

☐ (d) Conclusion. Based on the Consulting Expert's review of the known facts and other relevant materials, the Consulting Expert has concluded that the filing of the claim against each licensed professional Defendant does not lack substantial justification within the meaning of C.R.S. § 13-17-102(4).

4. Expert Consultation Statement

The undersigned has consulted with the Consulting Expert(s) prior to the filing of this Certificate. The consultation occurred on or before [__/__/____]. The Consulting Expert(s) reviewed the materials identified in Section 6 below and provided a verbal and/or written opinion that supports each of the certifications set forth in Section 3.

The Consulting Expert(s) are practicing or recently practicing professionals in the same or substantially similar field(s) as the Defendant licensed professional(s). Their identities and the substance of their opinions will be disclosed in the ordinary course of discovery, including through expert disclosures pursuant to C.R.C.P. 26(a)(2), and need not be disclosed in this Certificate. See Williams v. Boyle, 72 P.3d 392 (Colo. App. 2003).

5. Expert Qualifications Statement (C.R.S. § 13-64-401)

With respect to physician Defendants, the Consulting Expert(s) meet the qualifications of C.R.S. § 13-64-401 as follows:

☐ Each Consulting Expert is a physician licensed to practice medicine.

☐ Each Consulting Expert can demonstrate by competent evidence that, as a result of training, education, knowledge, and experience in the evaluation, diagnosis, and treatment of the disease or injury that is the subject matter of the action, he or she was substantially familiar with applicable standards of care and practice as they relate to the act or omission that is the subject of the claim, on the date of the alleged incident.

☐ Where the Defendant physician is a specialist in a particular medical subspecialty, each Consulting Expert practices in the same medical subspecialty as the Defendant physician, OR practices in a subspecialty in which the standards of care and practice are similar to those of the Defendant's subspecialty (a showing of similarity will be made at trial through competent evidence).

☐ With respect to any non-physician licensed health care professional Defendants (e.g., licensed nurses, physician assistants, advanced-practice nurses, physical therapists, pharmacists, dentists, podiatrists, chiropractors, optometrists), the Consulting Expert is qualified by training, education, knowledge, and experience to render an opinion concerning the standard of care applicable to that profession.

6. Materials Reviewed by Expert

The Consulting Expert(s) reviewed the following materials in reaching the conclusions referenced in Section 3:

☐ Plaintiff's medical records from [PROVIDER/FACILITY], dated [__/__/____] through [__/__/____];
☐ Hospital records (admission, ED, OR, ICU, discharge) from [FACILITY];
☐ Imaging studies and radiology reports ([CT, MRI, X-RAY, ULTRASOUND]);
☐ Pathology reports;
☐ Laboratory results;
☐ Operative reports and anesthesia records;
☐ Nursing notes, vital sign records, and medication administration records;
☐ Pharmacy records;
☐ Consultation reports;
☐ Death certificate and autopsy report (if applicable);
☐ Medical bills and statements;
☐ Photographs of injury, surgical site, or wound;
☐ Defendants' published policies, protocols, and procedures (where available);
☐ Manufacturer instructions, package inserts, FDA black-box warnings (where applicable);
☐ Peer-reviewed medical literature applicable to the standard of care;
☐ Plaintiff's narrative statement and timeline;
☐ Witness statements (if any);
☐ [OTHER MATERIALS].

7. Conclusion of Substantial Justification

Based on the Consulting Expert's review and opinion, and on the undersigned's independent legal analysis, the undersigned hereby certifies that the filing of the Complaint against each licensed professional Defendant does not lack substantial justification within the meaning of C.R.S. § 13-17-102(4), and that the action is well grounded in fact and warranted by existing law (or a good-faith argument for the extension, modification, or reversal of existing law) under C.R.C.P. 11.

8. Multiple Defendants — Separate Certifications

C.R.S. § 13-20-602 requires a separate certification analysis for each licensed professional Defendant. The undersigned certifies as follows for each such Defendant:

9. Reservation Regarding Expert Identity

The identity of the Consulting Expert(s), the substance of communications between counsel and the Consulting Expert(s), and any draft or preliminary opinions are protected from disclosure under the work-product doctrine and C.R.C.P. 26(b)(4) until designation as a testifying expert. The undersigned reserves all such protections. This Certificate does not waive, and is not intended to waive, any such protection.

10. Verification

I, [ATTORNEY NAME], being duly sworn upon oath, depose and state that I am the attorney of record for Plaintiff in the above-captioned action; that I have read the foregoing Certificate of Review; and that the certifications set forth herein are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief.

____________________________
[ATTORNEY NAME], Esq.
Atty. Reg. # [_____]

STATE OF COLORADO )
) ss.
COUNTY OF [_____] )

Subscribed and sworn to (or affirmed) before me this [___] day of [__________], 20[__], by [ATTORNEY NAME].

____________________________
Notary Public
My commission expires: [__/__/____]
[NOTARY SEAL]

11. Signature Block

Respectfully submitted this [___] day of [__________], 20[__].

____________________________
[ATTORNEY NAME], Atty. Reg. # [_____]
[FIRM NAME]
[STREET ADDRESS]
[CITY], CO [ZIP]
Telephone: [(___) ___-____]
Email: [____________]
Attorney for Plaintiff(s)

12. Certificate of Service

I hereby certify that on [__/__/____], a true and correct copy of the foregoing CERTIFICATE OF REVIEW PURSUANT TO C.R.S. § 13-20-602 was served via the Colorado Courts E-Filing System (CCES) and/or U.S. Mail, postage prepaid, on the following:

____________________________
[ATTORNEY NAME or PARALEGAL]

13. Practice Notes — Timing, Extensions, and Consequences

A. The 60-Day Clock

• The clock runs from the date of service of the complaint, counterclaim, or cross-claim on each licensed-professional Defendant, not from the date of filing.
• For multiple Defendants served on different dates, the safer practice is to file by the earliest deadline.
• Counterclaims and cross-claims trigger a separate 60-day clock — be alert when defending against amended pleadings.

B. Good-Cause Extensions

C.R.S. § 13-20-602 permits the court to grant a longer period "for good cause shown." Common bases for extension include:

• Defendants' failure to timely produce medical records;
• Difficulty locating a qualified specialty expert;
• Need for additional records following an early autopsy or pathology review;
• Defendants' assertion of a peer-review or HIPAA privilege requiring motion practice.

A motion for extension should be filed BEFORE the 60-day deadline expires whenever practicable. See Shelton v. Penrose/St. Francis Healthcare System, 984 P.2d 623 (Colo. 1999).

C. Consequences of Failure to File

• Mandatory dismissal. "The failure to file a certificate of review in accordance with this section shall result in the dismissal of the complaint, counterclaim, or cross claim." C.R.S. § 13-20-602(4).
• The dismissal is typically with prejudice if the limitations period has expired.
• Some courts have allowed late filings where the plaintiff demonstrates substantial compliance and the defendant has not been prejudiced — but do not rely on this discretion.

D. Common Pitfalls

• ☐ Failing to file a separate certificate for each licensed-professional Defendant.
• ☐ Filing a certificate that recites the statute but omits the expert-review element.
• ☐ Using an expert whose specialty does not match the Defendant's, without a similarity showing under § 13-64-401.
• ☐ Naming the expert in the certificate and inadvertently waiving work-product protection.
• ☐ Forgetting to file a new certificate when an amended complaint adds a new licensed-professional Defendant.

E. Discovery Implications

Although the certificate need not name the expert, defense counsel will frequently:

• Serve a Rule 26(b)(4) inquiry into the consulting expert;
• Move for an in camera review of the certificate basis where dismissal is sought;
• Request leave to take a Rule 30(b)(6) deposition regarding compliance.

Document the expert review in your file with date-stamped engagement letters, billing records (without disclosing substantive opinions), and a contemporaneous file memorandum.

14. Sources and References

• C.R.S. § 13-20-602 (Certificate of Review) — https://codes.findlaw.com/co/title-13-courts-and-court-procedure/co-rev-st-sect-13-20-602/
• C.R.S. § 13-64-401 (Expert qualifications)
• C.R.S. § 13-17-102 (Frivolous claims; substantial justification)
• C.R.C.P. 11; C.R.C.P. 26(a)(2), (b)(4)
• Martinez v. Badis, 842 P.2d 245 (Colo. 1992)
• Williams v. Boyle, 72 P.3d 392 (Colo. App. 2003)
• Yadon v. Southward, 64 P.3d 909 (Colo. App. 2002)
• Shelton v. Penrose/St. Francis Healthcare System, 984 P.2d 623 (Colo. 1999)
• Sherman v. Klenke, 2014 COA 142 (certificate sufficiency)
• Colorado Civil Jury Instructions 4th, ch. 15
• Colorado Courts E-Filing System (CCES) — https://www.jbits.courts.state.co.us/efiling/web
• Certificates of Review for Professional Negligence Actions in Colorado, JD Porter LLC — https://www.jdporterlaw.com/285-2/certificates-review-professional-negligence-actions-colorado/