Justice Melissa Hart missed a third straight week of case considerations as of Monday, with the Colorado Supreme Court indicating she again did not participate in the court’s weekly decision-making about whether to accept or reject pending appeals.

The Colorado Judicial Department told Colorado Politics last week that Hart has been on a leave of absence from the Supreme Court since Oct. 28, without elaborating about the reason or the duration for her leave.

On Monday, Hart provided a statement for the first time via text message about her absence.

“I have very much appreciated the expressions of concern and support I have received from colleagues in the legal community as I have taken a necessary personal leave for family and personal health reasons,” she told Colorado Politics. “I will let the Chief Justice and the State Court Administrator know when the issues are resolved so that I can return to work.”

“I am trying to balance competing needs. I have been in Florida, California and Colorado” since the week of Oct. 20, she said in a brief follow-up phone call.

Multiple appellate lawyers told Colorado Politics previously that they could not recall a similar instance of a justice absenting themselves from the Supreme Court during the September-June term. In addition to Hart’s formal leave, she also was not present during oral arguments the week of Oct. 20 for personal reasons.

Colorado Politics asked Chief Justice Monica M. Márquez, through the judicial branch, whether she knows where Hart is, whether the Supreme Court is delaying its release of decisions until her return and whether Márquez had any response to the absence.

Colorado Politics also requested a comment from Justice Maria E. Berkenkotter, who spoke alongside Márquez at an Oct. 28 legal event about the importance of “transparency in the judiciary” so that “people can understand what we’re doing and why.”

“As previously provided, Justice Hart has been on temporary leave of absence since October 28, 2025, with her return date undetermined at this time. The judicial system is designed to operate effectively, even when individual justices may be unable to participate in court matters,” the Judicial Department responded in a statement. “Supreme Court proceedings and decisions will continue as scheduled, without delays for litigants.”

However, it is unclear whether Hart’s absence is not affecting litigants. The week of Nov. 3, the Supreme Court did not accept any cases on appeal, although two justices indicated they would have taken up a consumer protection case. That fell just short of the three votes required — with Hart not participating.

Once again, the Nov. 17 case announcements similarly indicated there were two justices willing to accept a governmental immunity appeal, raising the question of whether Hart’s participation would have mattered.

Two years ago, Hart unveiled a new vision statement for the Judicial Department, which she was involved in crafting.

“We commit to acting with integrity, fairness and transparency. And we commit to being inclusive, collaborative and innovative,” she said at the time, adding that the judicial branch knows it is “not there yet.”

“But we will use those values to benchmark our policy choices. And I encourage you to tell us when we’re missing the mark,” Hart continued. “We’re using these to hold ourselves accountable but we’re also asking you to hold us accountable.”

The Supreme Court returns for oral arguments on Tuesday, where it will hear eight cases and also hold a hearing on a proposed rule change.