State Court of Appeals / Colo. Ct. App.

In Re the Marriage of Schmedeman

Decided February 21, 2008. David Furman wrote the opinion for the court.

190 P.3d 788 · Cited 157 times

Official text

We don’t host opinion text or publish a summary of this ruling — read the official public-domain text for the court’s holding and reasoning, and verify against the primary source.

Precedents cited

Decisions in our collection this opinion relies on, ordered by how often it cites each. Cases we publish link through; others open the full text.

In Re the Marriage of Balanson · 25 P.3d 28
Kujawinski v. Kujawinski · 376 N.E.2d 1382
Kalcevic v. Kalcevic · 397 P.2d 483
In Re Questions Submitted by United States Dist. Ct. · 517 P.2d 1331
In Re the Marriage of Antuna · 8 P.3d 589
In re the Marriage of Chalat · 112 P.3d 47
Taylor v. Taylor · 362 P.2d 1027
In Re the Marriage of Dale · 87 P.3d 219
Hoang v. Assurance Co. of America · 149 P.3d 798
In Re the Marriage of Zisch · 967 P.2d 199
In Re the Marriage of Emerson · 77 P.3d 923
Ward v. Ward · 30 P.2d 853
Matter of Estate of Haywood · 599 P.2d 976
LaParle v. State · 957 P.2d 330

Cited by

Later opinions in our collection that cite this decision.

In re the Marriage of Leverett · 318 P.3d 31
In re the Marriage of Paige · 282 P.3d 506
In Re Marriage of White and Martin · 240 P.3d 534
SL v. CAD · 278 P.3d 242
In re Corak · 412 P.3d 642

Explore from here

David Furman’s Judicial Record · Colo. Ct. App. · How we source opinions

Source: opinion metadata, authorship, and citation counts from the Free Law Project’s CourtListener bulk data (public domain). Data last verified 2026-07-09. Informational only; verify against the primary source before relying. Not a consumer report (FCRA).