Bindinglaw

CO · jury_instructions

CJI-Civ. 22:18

Affirmative Defense — Qualified Privilege — When Lost

activein force · 2026-02-25 – presentcompiled-edition

(When the defendant published the statement[s] in question [insert applicable

pronoun] was privileged to do so, because [describe the basic purpose of the privilege,

including what and whose interest the privilege is intended to protect, e.g., “an employee is

allowed to inform his or her employer of wrongdoing of a fellow employee for the purpose of

protecting the employer’s business”].)

(The defendant has the burden of proving the affirmative defense of privilege. If you

find that [describe the facts which, if proved, would give rise to the privilege as a matter of

law], then you must find that when the defendant published the statement[s] in question,

[insert applicable pronoun] was privileged to do so because [describe the purpose of the

privilege, including what and whose interest the privilege is intended to protect].)

(Because) (If) the defendant was privileged to publish the statement(s), then the

defendant is not legally responsible to the plaintiff and your verdict must be for the

defendant (unless the defendant abused the privilege. The existence of a privilege does not

protect the defendant if [insert applicable pronoun] abused the privilege).

(The affirmative defense of privilege is lost if the plaintiff proves the defendant

abused the privilege. The defendant abused the privilege if you find that when [insert

applicable pronoun] published the statement[s] in question:

1. [Insert applicable pronoun] knew the statement[s] to be false, or acted with

reckless disregard for whether the statement[s] [was] [were] false; or

2. [Insert applicable pronoun] acted primarily for purposes other than the protection

of the interest for which the privilege was given; or

3. [Insert applicable pronoun] knowingly published the statement[s] to [a person]

[persons] to whom its publication was not otherwise privileged, unless [insert applicable

pronoun] reasonably believed that the publication was a proper means of communicating

such matter to the person[s] to whom its publication was privileged; or

4. [Insert applicable pronoun] did not reasonably believe the publication of the

statement[s] to be necessary to accomplish the purpose for which the privilege was given.)

History

CJI-Civ. (2026), Colorado Supreme Court Committee on Pattern Civil Jury Instructions. Dated 2026-02-25 by the committee page's "Revised 2/25/26".

Provenance

Source
www.coloradojudicial.gov
Retrieved
2026-09-24
Edition
civ-2026-02-25
Content hash
ff6dccd7ce36e42b27a5b8db023865a42257a998fdaafb31bddbf047ede84033
View the official source →

The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.

Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.

Coverage · API docs

Bindinglaw

Point-in-time US law with the receipt attached. Source URL, retrieval time, content hash, and validity dates on every answer.

curl api.binding.law/v1/law/coverage

© 2026 binding.law · a Jubal, Inc. productAttorneys and firms never pay. Ever.