Parents call about "emergency custody" when something has gone badly wrong: a DUI with the child in the car, a hospital visit that does not match the explanation, a text that reads like a threat. Colorado has no emergency custody form and, in ordinary circumstances, no ex parte custody order. What it has is a motion to restrict parenting time under C.R.S. § 14-10-129(4). If the motion alleges that a child is in imminent physical or emotional danger from a parent's contact, the court must hear and rule on it within 14 days, and every minute of that parent's time in the meantime must be supervised. The deadline is still 14 days under the 2025 statutes, and the 2026 session did not change it.
That is a powerful tool with a sharp edge. A well-built motion protects a child within days. A weak one earns a mandatory fee award and a credibility problem that follows the filer to permanent orders.
How Section 14-10-129(4) Works
The mechanics come from the statute and from the Colorado Supreme Court's decision in In re Marriage of Wollert (2020 CO 47).
- The motion must state with particularity, under C.R.C.P. 7(b), the facts showing imminent physical or emotional danger. Reciting the statutory phrase is not enough; Wollert calls that "parroting buzzwords." A motion that fails this test can be denied on its face, and the supervision requirement never attaches.
- If the motion is facially sufficient, the court may not deny it by deciding on paper that the allegations are not credible. It must hold a hearing within 14 days. The Supreme Court said the statute requires courts "to err on the side of protecting children," even when a motion looks unlikely to prevail.
- The restriction is self-executing. From filing until the ruling, the other parent's time must be supervised by an unrelated third party the court deems suitable or by a licensed mental health professional. Judges often enter a short forthwith order confirming this and setting the hearing.
- At the hearing the moving parent must prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that parenting time would endanger the child's physical health or significantly impair the child's emotional development. Imminence gets the hearing; endangerment decides it.
- An order restricting time must list the specific findings that support it and may list the conditions the restricted parent can meet to seek modification. A restricted parent's verified motion to modify triggers a 35-day review under § 14-10-129(2.5).
The hearing is short. Courts commonly allot an hour or two total, document subpoenas are impractical inside 14 days, and experts are hard to line up. The court cannot continue the hearing over the restricted parent's objection without a finding that the parent waived the deadline. In In re Webb (2023) the Supreme Court intervened where a magistrate sent a parent who had had no parenting time for two years to mediation instead of holding the hearing.
What Counts as Danger
The statute does not define "danger" or "endangerment," and appellate courts describe the question as highly individualized. In practice the motions that survive describe a specific, recent event with evidence attached: an arrest report, a hospital record, a photograph, a text message, a witness who saw it. Impaired driving with the child, an overdose, a new domestic-violence arrest, untreated psychosis, a young child left alone, a credible threat to disappear with the child. Wollert itself involved allegations of long-running alienation, corroborated by a therapist's detailed report, which the Court held were enough to require a hearing.
What does not survive: a messy house, a new partner, a difference in discipline philosophy, a child's reluctance without more, or an old incident already litigated. The Court of Appeals in In re Marriage of Wenciker (2022) confirmed that incidents raised in a denied motion to restrict can be raised again in a later motion to modify, so a parent with real but non-imminent concerns has a slower path without the fee risk.
Motion to Restrict, Protection Order, or Dependency and Neglect
Three procedures overlap here and serve different purposes.
A civil protection order under C.R.S. § 13-14-104.5 protects a person from assault, domestic abuse, stalking, or sexual violence. A temporary order can issue ex parte if the judge finds "a risk or threat of physical harm or the threat of psychological or emotional harm," with a permanent-order hearing set within 14 days. Since January 1, 2025, a county court issuing a protection order can award temporary care and control of the children for up to a year, including supervised parenting time, using the best-interests standard. That makes a protection order a fast way to protect a parent and, incidentally, the child. But a later order in the divorce or parental-responsibilities case supersedes those custody terms, and Colorado's bench book warns judges that temporary protection orders entered on thin evidence "tend to create de facto final orders." A protection order is the right tool when you are the one in danger; the motion to restrict is the right tool when the child is.
A dependency and neglect case is different in kind. The county files it in juvenile court under Title 19, the state is a party, a guardian ad litem is appointed for a child under twelve, and the juvenile case divests the domestic relations court of jurisdiction while it is pending. D&N is what happens when neither parent is safe, or when a mandatory reporter's call leads the county to act. A parent does not choose it; a parent can only report and cooperate.
Ex Parte Orders and the Police
Colorado domestic relations judges rarely enter custody orders without notice; the § 14-10-129(4) supervision requirement does that work. Two practical points follow. The police will generally enforce a signed order, not a motion, so file a proposed order stating the effective date, the supervision requirement, and the hearing date, and ask the court to sign it forthwith. And if the danger allows it, file when the child is already with you. A motion filed while the child is in the other home can require a police standby to execute, which is its own trauma for the child.
The Evidence That Persuades, and the Cost of a Weak Motion
Judges in these hearings want dates, documents, and disinterested witnesses. A chronology with times. The message thread, not a screenshot of one line. The police report number. The pediatrician's note. The teacher who saw the bruise. Hearsay rules apply, though emergency-type exceptions often help, and a parent's own credibility on the stand matters more than in almost any other family hearing.
The downside is written into the statute. Under § 14-10-129(5), if the court finds the motion was substantially frivolous, groundless, or vexatious, it "shall" order the filer to pay the other parent's attorney fees and costs. The fee award is the smaller cost. The larger one is that the judge, the CFI, and eventually the permanent-orders court will read the failed motion as evidence on the statutory factor about a parent's ability to encourage the child's relationship with the other parent. A parent who cries wolf has handed the other side its best exhibit.
The First 24 Hours
- Make the child safe first. If there is an injury, go to the emergency room; the record is evidence. If a crime occurred, call the police.
- Write down what happened while it is fresh: times, places, exact words, who else was present.
- Preserve everything. Export the message thread. Save voicemails. Photograph injuries and conditions with timestamps.
- Call a lawyer before you act on the plan. Withholding the child without a motion converts you from the protective parent into the respondent in an enforcement action under § 14-10-129.5, where fees are mandatory against the parent who denied time.
- Identify a supervisor. Proposing a qualified, available supervisor in the motion removes the argument that you are using the process to cut off contact.
If you are the parent on the receiving end: do not contact the other parent except through counsel, comply with supervision to the letter, gather your own evidence, and propose your own supervisor. The hearing is 14 days away, and the parent who arrives organized and calm is in a far stronger position than the one who arrives angry.
Talk to a Denver Divorce Attorney About an Emergency Custody Motion
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. These are the cases he fights hardest, and the 14-day clock means the first conversation should happen the day the problem does. A first meeting is a paid consultation, not a free call and not a sales pitch.
Read the full guides on DenverDivorce.com: Emergency & Protection Orders and Supervised Parenting Time in Colorado.
Educational information only, not legal advice. Reading this article does not create an attorney-client relationship.
