Laserfiche WebLink
<br />-' <br />.' <br /> <br />JQ- <br />I;;'" <br /> <br />4. In situations such as this, when litigants have settled their disputes by <br />stipulaiion~ it is appropriate for such parties to file stipulations with the Court. It is further <br />appropriate for the Court to accept such stipulations or state solid reasons why the <br />stipulation should not be accepted. Colorado River Water Conservation District v. Bar <br />Forty Seven Co., 195 Colo. 478, 579 P.2d 636 (1978); U.S. v. Northern Colorado <br />Conservancy District, 608 F .2d 422 (10tb Cir. 1979). <br /> <br />5. Stipulations are appropriate in this type of circumstance where a party <br />stipulates or makes an agreement concerning a valuable property right. Moreover, the <br />Court should recognize such stipulation when such stipulation does not violate rules of <br />public policy. Kempter v. Hurd, 713 P.2d 1274 (Colo. 1986). Court approval of a <br />stipulation is especially appropriate in a case such as this where no questions of law ar'e <br />raised and where the stipulation does not create manifest injustice. Bar 70 Enterprises, Inc. <br />v. Tosco Corp., 703 P.2d 1297 (Colo. 1985); Lake Meredith Reservoir Co. v. Amiti Mut. <br />Irri. Co., 698 P.2d 1340 (Colo. 1985). <br /> <br />6. Counsel for the CWCB has conferred. with Counsel for the objectors, who <br />have consented to this Motion. <br /> <br />r !I, <br /> <br />WHEREFORE the CWCB moves this Court to enter an Order approving the: <br />Stipulations entered into between the CWCB and the Robert and Elaine Gay Family LLP; <br />and the CWCB ,and the Upper Y ampa Water Conservancy District, and to enter the <br />attached Findings of Fact, Judgment,an:d'Decreeoft1u~ Wat~ ~ourt.: <br /> <br />Dated this' J~;1... day of September, 2003. <br /> <br />i <br /> <br />KEN SALAZAR <br />Attorney General <br /> <br /> <br />2 <br />