¶ 16 An amount is liquidated or determinable for purposes of section 13–80–103.5(1)(a) if the amount due is ascertainable by reference to an agreement or by simple computation, even if reference must be made to facts external to the agreement. See Rotenberg v. Richards, 899 P.2d 365, 367–68 (Colo.App.1995); see also Interbank Invs., L.L.C. v. Vail Valley Consol. Water Dist., 12 P.3d 1224, 1230 (Colo.App.2000). However,
[a] sum is not liquidated or determinable merely because a fact finder, armed with information relevant to determining the amount owed, can arrive at a specific amount of damages. After all, such a determination is possible in every contract action in which the amount claimed is not speculative. Rather, a sum is liquidated or determinable within the meaning of section 13–80–103.5(1)(a) only where the agreement sets forth an amount owed or a formula for calculating an amount owed.
Portercare Adventist Health Sys. v. Lego,
312 P.3d 201 (Colo.App.2010) (cert. granted Mar. 14, 2011).
3 ¶ 17 Here, plaintiff is not seeking damages for nonpayment for services it actually provided to defendants. Rather, it seeks to recover damages based on services it never received the opportunity to provide which, according to the complaint, caused plaintiff “loss of business revenue, loss of business, short and long term financial and professional harm” and “future financial injuries, damages and losses.”