Inc. v. City of Boulder

          Boulder County District Court No. 17CV30652. Honorable Patrick Butler, Judge.

         COUNSEL:

          LaszloLaw, Theodore E. Laszlo, Jr., Michael J. Laszlo, Boulder, Colorado; Sean Connelly, Denver, Colorado, for Plaintiff-Appellant.

          Thomas A. Carr, City Attorney, Luis Toro, Senior Assistant City Attorney, Boulder, Colorado, for Defendant-Appellee City of Boulder.

          Ben Perlman, County Attorney, David Hughes, Deputy County Attorney, Catherine R. Ruhland, Assistant County Attorney, Boulder, Colorado, for Defendant-Appellee Michael Dougherty.

          Judges: Opinion by JUDGE J. JONES. Roman and Lipinsky, JJ., concur.

         OPINION

           J. JONES, JUDGE

Page 764

          [¶ 1] Plaintiff, The Pro's Closet, Inc., appeals the district court's summary judgment in favor of defendant, the City of Boulder. The court ruled that Pro's Closet is a " pawnbroker" as defined in section 29-11.9-101, C.R.S. 2018, and is therefore subject to the requirements, restrictions, and potential sanctions of the state pawnbroker laws, sections 29-11.9-101 to - 104, C.R.S. 2018. Because we conclude that the district court didn't err in interpreting the pawnbroker statutes, we affirm the judgment.

          I. Background

          [¶ 2] Pro's Closet is licensed in Boulder as a secondhand dealer under the Boulder Revised Code. It sells used bicycles, bicycle parts, and bicycle gear. Though it has a warehouse in Boulder, Pro's Closet does most of its business online.

          [¶ 3] In 2016, the Twentieth Judicial District's District Attorney's Office told the Boulder Police Department to treat Pro's Closet as a " pawnbroker" under state law, meaning, among other things, that Pro's Closet must hold used goods it buys for thirty days before reselling them instead of ninety-six hours as required by the Boulder Revised Code's secondhand dealer ordinances. See § 29-11.9-103(6), C.R.S. 2018; Boulder Rev. Code 4-17-10. Pro's Closet filed suit, seeking a declaratory judgment that it isn't subject to state pawnbroker laws.

          [¶ 4] Both Pro's Closet and the City moved for summary judgment. The district court granted the City's motion, concluding that,

Page 765

since Pro's Closet regularly makes " purchase transaction[s]" as defined by section 29-11.9-101(8), it is a pawnbroker under state law.

          II. Discussion

          [¶ 5] Pro's Closet argues on appeal that (1) the district court erred in ruling that it is a pawnbroker under section 29-11.9-101; and (2) because Colorado's and the City's secondhand dealer laws are more specific to its business, it isn't subject to state pawnbroker laws.^[1] We reject both arguments.

          A. Pro's Closet is a Pawnbroker Under State Law

          [¶ 6] Pro's Closet argues first that the district court incorrectly interpreted section 29-11.9-101 in concluding that it is a " pawnbroker."

1. Standard of Review and Interpretive Principles

          [¶ 7] We review issues of statutory interpretation de novo. Colo. Oil & Gas Conservation Comm'n ...