Harriman v. Cabela's Inc.

Opinion by

JUDGE BERNARD

T1 Colorado case law holds that a litigant cannot file a C.R.C.P. 60 motion as a substitute for an appeal or to avoid C.R.C.P. 59(J). This appeal raises the following question: Should a C.R.C.P. 60(b)(1) motion, which alleged that a litigant did not timely *760respond to a C.R.C.P. 12(b)(5) motion because of excusable neglect, be deemed denied . by operation of C.R.C.P. 59(J)? The facts of this case lead us to answer this question “no.” ,. . T2 The plaintiff in this case, David Harri-man, was injured when he was a customer testing a hunting bow at an archery range in a…