Welcome to Court Crawl, Colorado Politics’ roundup of news from the third branch of government. The Biden administration’s judicial for nominee for Colorado is scheduled to go before senators this week, and the newest Supreme Court justice in Colorado issued a standout dissenting opinion that packed a punch.

The word from on high

> It isn’t every day that the state’s highest court reviews someone’s medical bill, but the Colorado Supreme Court announced it would do just that. The justices will hear the appeal of a woman who agreed before her surgery to pay “all charges” that insurance didn’t cover. Those amounted to $229,000. A jury cut her verdict to just $767 after a trial court judge deemed “all charges” referred to reasonable charges, but the Court of Appeals reinstated the original amount.

•  At issue is whether the hospital could bill based on the “chargemaster,” a list of prices that exceeds what hospitals negotiate with insurance companies.

•  “For whatever reason, some (not all) courts have allowed hospitals to collect on charges that are not disclosed, impossible for patients to discover, and are so high that no informed payer would ever agree to them.” —Barak Richman, a professor of law and business administration at Duke University, speaking of the chargemaster

Focus on Justice Berkenkotter

> In a 4-3 decision last Monday, a majority of justices decided that lying about your income on an application for public benefits means you can be charged with theft of the whole amount. The dissenting justices believed if you are legally eligible for some amount of financial aid, a theft conviction should only be based on the extra amount obtained through fraud.

•  Two interesting points: first, the decision featured all four male justices on one side and all three female justices on the other. Second, this case followed almost precisely in the footsteps of the Ohio Supreme Court, which decided exactly 20 years ago — also on a 4-3 basis — in the exact same way on the theft of public benefits.

> The strongly-worded dissenting opinion came from the newest justice, Maria E. Berkenkotter, who was so concerned about the implications of the decision that she went so far as to ask the General Assembly to change the law.

•  To date, Berkenkotter has been a quiet presence during oral arguments. As opposed to the justices who regularly interject questions or repeatedly follow up with lawyers, Berkenkotter’s most common words have been “I defer,” letting the senior justices have their say.

•  So it was a bit surprising to see such strong phrasing as, “This case illustrates the dangers of the sweeping assumptions built into the majority’s iteration” coming from Berkenkotter. During the next round of oral arguments, we will see whether Berkenkotter’s deference persists.

Judge resignation update

> Since the Supreme Court announced that Arapahoe County District Court Judge Natalie T. Chase will resign for multiple instances of misconduct, Colorado Politics reviewed a statement of allegations against Chase that contained a more extensive set of complaints than originally disclosed.

•  While Chase has made national news for saying the N-word repeatedly in front of a Black court employee, the allegations also included that Chase planned to sue her son’s school and asked her clerk to do research on this non-work-related matter; that she wished everyone a “happy Father’s Day” right after terminating a father’s parental rights; and that she questioned lawyers about what they wrote about her in anonymous judicial reviews.

Chauvin verdict

> The Sam Cary Bar Association, the professional organization for Colorado’s Black attorneys, held a discussion two days after a jury convicted former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin for murdering George Floyd. Among the takeaways: a desire for accountability among police supervisors, a skepticism about the accountability signified by the verdict, and a disconnect between what law enforcement leaders say and what patrol officers do.

Vacancies and appointments

> Three months and one week after President Joe Biden’s inauguration, the U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary will consider the first five of the administration’s nominees to the federal bench on Wednesday. Those include Regina M. Rodriguez, Biden’s nominee for the vacant trial court seat in Colorado.

> There is a vacancy on the Arapahoe County District Court effective May 31, and applications are due to the judicial district’s nominating commission by May 5.

> In El Paso County, Gov. Jared Polis will select a finalist to succeed former Judge Laura Findorff. The three attorneys vying for the seat are Marika Frady, Steven Katzman and Amanda Philipps.

Taylor Swift and Guantanamo Bay

> What ties those very different things together is Jeffrey P. Colwell, the clerk of the U.S. District Court in Colorado. A former military prosecutor and defender of Guantanamo Bay detainees, Colwell also handled logistics for the high-profile 2017 trial involving singer Taylor Swift. He spoke to Colorado Politics in a Q&A.

•  “While I had several opportunities to do so, I did not meet Ms. Swift personally. She was in our courthouse because of a legal proceeding, not for me to get her autograph….One of our court employees, however, took the day off and brought her daughter in to watch some of the trial. During a break in the case, her daughter got to meet and speak with Taylor briefly. It made her day.” —Jeffrey Colwell

Miscellaneous decisions

> A man who had his convictions reversed on legal grounds is not eligible for compensation for the time he spent incarcerated, the Court of Appeals ruled.

> A Denver judge was wrong to conclude he had no authority to approve payments for an indigent man’s defense, the Supreme Court and the Denver District Attorney’s Office both agreed.

> A Fremont County magistrate acted beyond his authority when he dismissed an inmate’s COVID-19-related petition, the Supreme Court decided.