In a custody case where both parents have lawyers and the fight has gone on long enough, a Colorado judge can add a third lawyer to the courtroom, one whose client is not a parent. The child's legal representative, or CLR, is appointed under C.R.S. § 14-10-116 to represent the best interests of the child. The CLR can file motions, call witnesses, cross-examine the parents, and argue at the final hearing. What the CLR cannot do is testify, write a report, or simply repeat what the child wants.
Parents who hear "the court is appointing a lawyer for the kids" want to know what this person does and how much it changes the case. The answers are "more than you expect" and "a great deal."
Guardian ad Litem, Special Advocate, CFI, CLR: Sorting Out the Names
Older Colorado decrees refer to a "guardian ad litem" or, from the late 1990s, a "special advocate" appointed to look after the children. Those labels are gone from the domestic relations statute. In 2005 the legislature split the old special-advocate role into distinct positions; the investigator became the child and family investigator under C.R.S. § 14-10-116.5, and the attorney who advocates for the child's best interests kept a separate statute, § 14-10-116, under the name child's legal representative.
Guardians ad litem still exist, but mainly in juvenile court, where a GAL is mandatory for every child under twelve in a dependency and neglect case. In a district-court divorce or parental-responsibilities case, the three appointments you will meet are the CFI, the parental responsibilities evaluator (PRE, under § 14-10-127), and the CLR.
What a CLR Does and Does Not Do
The CLR must be a Colorado-licensed attorney in good standing. The statute directs the CLR to represent the child's best interests, as defined by the factors in § 14-10-124, on parenting time, decision-making, financial support, the child's property, or any other child-related issue. The CLR "shall actively participate in all aspects of the case": discovery, subpoenas, motions, settlement conferences, direct and cross-examination, and closing argument.
Two features set the CLR apart. First, the CLR is not the child's mouthpiece. The Colorado Supreme Court held in In re Marriage of Hartley (1994) that a child has no right to choose counsel and that the appointed attorney is not obligated to advocate the child's views. The Court of Appeals put it more bluntly in In re Marriage of Barnthouse (1988): the CLR "is not simply to parrot the child's expressed wishes." The statute agrees; the CLR considers the child's wishes but need not adopt them unless they serve the child's best interests.
Second, the CLR is not a witness. Section 14-10-116(2)(a) says the CLR "shall not be called as a witness in the case." There is no CLR report to attack on cross-examination because there is no report. The CLR's influence arrives the way a lawyer's does: through the evidence the CLR develops, the questions the CLR asks, and the position the CLR argues.
CLR Versus CFI Versus PRE
- A child and family investigator is a neutral investigator who interviews the parents, the child, and collaterals and files a written report with options for the court, due at least 35 days before the hearing unless the order says otherwise. The CFI can be cross-examined, cannot do psychological testing, and is capped by Chief Justice Directive 04-08 at a presumptive private-pay fee of a little over $3,300 absent specific findings.
- A parental responsibilities evaluator is a licensed mental health professional who conducts a full evaluation, may include psychological testing, and files a report at least 21 days before the hearing. A PRE costs more, and the statute now tells the court to ask first whether a CFI would suffice.
- A child's legal representative advocates. No report, no testimony, no cross-examination of the CLR. The CLR may call and cross-examine witnesses, including the CFI or PRE.
The roles cannot be combined. The same person may not serve as both CLR and CFI, and under CJD 04-08 a CFI may not later become the CLR in the same case or for the same family, though a court can appoint both. The CLR's standing also appears in § 14-10-124(4): where the court finds child abuse or domestic violence, joint decision-making cannot be ordered over the objection of the other parent "or the legal representative of the child."
When Judges Appoint One
The appointment is discretionary; the Court of Appeals has upheld a refusal to appoint a CLR where the judge already knew the child's wishes. The cases where judges do reach for one share a few features:
- High conflict where each parent's lawyer is doing a competent job for the parent and no one is presenting the child's case.
- Allegations of abuse, domestic violence, or coercive control. Under Kayden's Law, C.R.S. § 14-10-127.5, the court must give strong consideration to a child's stated preference conveyed to a CFI, PRE, or CLR if it is consistent with the child's safety. A CLR is often how that preference reaches the judge without the child taking the stand.
- Older children with strong, sometimes shifting, opinions. A fourteen-year-old who wants to live with the parent who has no rules needs someone who can weigh that wish against the record.
- Cases where one parent intends to tear apart a CFI or PRE report, post-decree fights where the children have become the battleground, and grandparent family-time petitions under § 14-10-124.4(5).
The cost is real. A CLR bills hourly like any lawyer, with no presumptive cap comparable to the CFI cap. Section 14-10-116(3) requires the court to order the CLR's fees against "any or all of the parties"; the state pays only if the responsible parties are indigent, and in a pending divorce both spouses must be indigent on their combined income and assets. Expect the allocation to track relative incomes, and in a case that runs a year with a contested hearing, expect a CLR's fees to rival a parent's own.
Qualifications and Training After the Reforms
Three rounds of legislation reshaped who can serve. Julie's Law (2021) added domestic-violence training to § 14-10-116. Kayden's Law (2023) created § 14-10-127.5, and HB24-1350, effective August 7, 2024, expanded it. A CLR who does not contract with the Office of the Child's Representative must complete no less than 20 hours of initial training and 15 hours every five years on child abuse, coercive control, trauma, bias, victim and perpetrator dynamics, interviewing, and forensic report writing, from a trainer with substantial experience assisting survivors.
The CLR must also follow the Rules of Professional Conduct and the practice standards issued through the Office of the Child's Representative. Within seven days of appointment the CLR must disclose any familial, financial, or social relationship with the child, either party, counsel, or the judge. A party then has seven days to object, and silence confirms the appointment.
How to Conduct Yourself With a CLR on the Case
The CLR is not your lawyer and not a messenger. Nothing you say to the CLR is privileged, and the CLR can use it in court.
- Cooperate fully and promptly. Sign releases, hand over school and medical records, and name the teachers, coaches, and pediatricians before you are asked twice.
- Do not coach the child and do not debrief the child afterward. Asking "what did you tell the lawyer" shows the CLR that the child is not free to speak in your home.
- Treat every call and email as if the judge were copied. Tone is evidence on the factor about placing the child's needs ahead of your own.
- Do not lobby, and do not attack the CLR because you dislike the position. Barnthouse affirmed a refusal to remove a CLR who disagreed with the children she represented; a motion to disqualify usually costs more credibility than it wins.
- Pay the fee allocation on time. Nonpayment gets reported to the court.
The parent who does these things tends to find the CLR arguing for a plan that parent can live with. The parent who treats the CLR as an adversary meets that adversary at trial.
Talk to a Denver Divorce Attorney About a Child's Legal Representative
Aaron Herzberg is a divorce attorney in Greenwood Village, Colorado, serving Denver and the Front Range, with more than 30 years of trial experience and a practice focused on divorce, custody, and financially complex family law. Whether to ask for a CLR, oppose one, or shape the order of appointment is a decision best made before the motion is filed, not after the appointment is confirmed. A first meeting is a paid consultation, not a free call and not a sales pitch.
Read the full guide on DenverDivorce.com: Parental Responsibilities (Custody) in Colorado.
Educational information only, not legal advice. Reading this article does not create an attorney-client relationship.
