Statute of Limitations for Unjust Enrichment / Restitution in Colorado

Overview

In Colorado, claims labeled “unjust enrichment” or “restitution” usually fall under the umbrella of equitable restitution (sometimes pleaded as a “constructive trust” or “restitution/recovery of money”). Even when a case is framed as equity rather than tort or contract, Colorado courts still apply a statute of limitations based on the type of claim and the legal theory being pursued.

DocketMath’s statute-of-limitations calculator helps you estimate the deadline by mapping the claim to the most common Colorado limitations periods and then calculating the running date from the event you select (often the date of the wrongful receipt, tender, or demand). This can be useful for early case triage—especially when pleadings mix legal and equitable theories.

Limitation period

Colorado statutes provide limitations periods for actions for relief that sound in law (contracts, torts) and for certain statutory claims. For unjust enrichment and restitution, the limitation period often depends on the “substance over label” approach—meaning courts look to what the claim really seeks.

In practice, Colorado cases most commonly treat restitution claims as having one of these time horizons:

• 3 years for claims typically characterized as fraud, statutory penalties, or certain “liability created by statute,” depending on the pleaded facts and theory.
• 6 years for actions upon written contracts and for certain other civil actions where the legislature chose a longer period.

How the “trigger” date changes your deadline

The “statute of limitations clock” may start at different times depending on the claim structure. Common patterns include:

• Event-based accrual: the period starts when the defendant receives/keeps the money (or when the plaintiff has a complete cause of action).
• Demand-based accrual (for some restitution frameworks): in some restitution theories, a plaintiff may need to make a demand before the claim is considered actionable; the clock can start when demand is made or refused.
• Discovery concepts (limited but real): Colorado has doctrines that can affect when a claim accrues, particularly in fraud-type settings. Discovery-related accrual does not universally apply to every equitable restitution claim.

Practical triage checklist (what to gather before running the calculator)

To get an output you can use for workflow decisions, collect:

• The date(s) the money was transferred or withheld
• Whether there was a demand (and the demand date) if your theory uses demand/refusal
• The date you filed (or plan to file)
• The basis you intend to plead (e.g., restitution for money obtained through wrongful conduct vs. restitution of mistaken payments)

Use the calculator to reflect the approach you think aligns best with your facts and pleadings; then sanity-check whether a different characterization would move the deadline.

Quick comparison table (typical timelines)

Because unjust enrichment and restitution can be pleaded and analyzed in multiple ways, you should run the calculator with more than one scenario if your facts could fit different characterizations.

Key exceptions

Even when you identify the correct baseline limitations period, Colorado timing outcomes can shift due to recognized doctrines. Below are the main categories that frequently matter in restitution-type disputes:

1) Tolling (pauses to the clock)

Tolling doctrines can pause or extend the limitations period in specific circumstances, such as certain disability, litigation-related pauses, or legally recognized barriers that prevent timely filing. Tolling is fact-specific, and the details depend on the underlying claim.

Workflow tip: If any tolling facts exist (for example, disability or other legally recognized barriers), capture dates precisely. Your clock calculation depends on when tolling starts and ends.

2) Accrual changes based on when the claim becomes actionable

For some restitution structures, the cause of action may not be complete until a triggering event occurs (e.g., a demand and refusal pattern). If your theory involves demand, your accrual inputs should include:

• Demand date
• Refusal date (if relevant)
• The moment the plaintiff could legally claim entitlement

3) Choice-of-theory effects (substance over form)

Colorado courts can recharacterize claims depending on the underlying facts and requested relief. That means your chosen “label” (unjust enrichment vs. contract vs. fraud) can affect the limitations period that the court applies.

Practical implication: if your petition/complaint pleads multiple theories, you may need multiple calculator runs—one per theory—so your litigation plan reflects the shortest realistic deadline.

Statute citation

Colorado limitations periods for civil actions are set out in Colorado Revised Statutes (C.R.S.). Two commonly used provisions in civil limitations analysis are:

• C.R.S. § 13-80-101 — establishes general civil limitations periods and time frames for various categories of actions.
• C.R.S. § 13-80-108 — sets a 2-year limitations period for certain injuries to persons or property (included here as context because some claims framed as restitution may still be analyzed through injury categories if the factual “core” is an injury-based wrong rather than a pure money-restoration claim).

For unjust enrichment and restitution, the key step is matching your claim to the statute category that best fits the substance of the relief sought and the underlying wrong. DocketMath’s calculator implements that mapping workflow so you can focus on the dates and scenario selection rather than manually testing multiple statutory categories.

Use the calculator

DocketMath’s statute-of-limitations calculator helps you estimate the end date for filing based on Colorado limitations periods.

Inputs you’ll typically use

Suggested workflow (fast but disciplined)

1. Pick an initial scenario based on your most likely pleading characterization.
2. Run the calculator using the best-supported accrual date:

   • wrongful receipt/retention date, or
   • demand/refusal date, if your restitution theory depends on it.
3. Run one alternative scenario if facts could reasonably be characterized differently (for example, if there is fraud-like conduct or if the requested relief closely tracks a contract-based remedy).
4. Record:

   • The calculated limitations deadline
   • The earliest deadline among scenarios (often the most risk-relevant)
   • The **key assumptions (your chosen accrual rule)

To run the calculation, use the primary CTA: /tools/statute-of-limitations.

Once you have the result, align your internal checklist (notice, demand, evidence collection) to the earliest deadline you can plausibly face.

Sources and references

Start with the primary authority for Colorado and confirm the effective date before relying on any output. If the rule has been amended, update the inputs and rerun the calculation.

• Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-80-101

Related reading

• Choosing the right statute of limitations tool for Vermont — Tool comparison
• Statute of limitations in Singapore: how to estimate the deadline — How-to guide
• Choosing the right statute of limitations tool for Connecticut — Tool comparison