My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
C150240 Feasibility Study
CWCB
>
Loan Projects
>
DayForward
>
0001-1000
>
C150240 Feasibility Study
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/8/2015 2:10:33 PM
Creation date
3/4/2008 10:53:26 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Loan Projects
Contract/PO #
C150240
Contractor Name
Bull Creek Reservoir, Canal & Power Company
Contract Type
Loan
Water District
0
County
Mesa
Loan Projects - Doc Type
Feasibility Study
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
225
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
�:, <br />r.. <br />,06 13:24 6185399954 HEIDENREICH F'AKKtrc raut e.� <br />� J � <br />Protestant alleges excusable neglect on the filing of the �'rotestant's Rule 6(b) Mot�on as <br />follows: <br />1. Counsel prepared Protestazat's Rule 6(b) Motion and filed it by facsiz�xle <br />transmission wi�th t�uis Court on Januaay 3, 2006. The facsami�e cover sheet and transmission <br />verifiication report showing 8 pages received by the Court at the telephone number (970) 945- <br />8�56 are attached as Exhibit 1. <br />2. Upon seeing the transJZ�issioz� ve�i�cat�on zeport, Counsel believed that the <br />It�ouion had beez� zeceived by the Court. Counsel has prevlous�y filed many documents by <br />facsimile transmission with the Court without any difficulty, always rely�z�g on the tTansmission <br />veri�cabion repoxt that the doeument had been receaved. Ala documents pr�viously filed this way <br />had been received on a timely basis ar�d ��ed by tt�e Court on a timely basis. <br />3. Upon receiving the Court's Order of January � 7, 2006, Counsel spoke with the <br />Division 5 Watez Clezk who did not have a record of the filing of Pz'otestaz�t's Rule 6(b) Motion. <br />Counsel also spoke with the Garfield Combined Court Clerk conceming whether a log was kept <br />of facsimile transmissions received on January 3, 2006 and was told that if a�og was kept it <br />would ba.ve beeu destroyed by now. <br />4. Counsel was unable to determine the reason why tk�e Mot�oza was not received by <br />the Court and filed pzoperly. <br />WHEREFORE, Protestant respect�fu�ly zequests that this Court pursuant to CRCP 60 <br />relieve the Pzotestant of the Order of January 17, 2006 on the gz�ounds o£ excusable neglect, <br />accept the Pmtestant's Rule 6(b) Motioz► filed with the Court on January 3, 2006, an�d approve <br />the Second Amendz��en�t to Stipulalion and Agr�eement filed by the parties ozz Decez�nnbez 9, 2005 <br />on the grounds of excusable negtect. <br />Dated this 18th da.y of January, 2006. <br />Rosemarie Heidenreich Paxker <br />Attorney for Pzotestaint <br />PO Box 125 <br />Freeburg, IL 62243 <br />Phone: (618) 539-9956 <br />Fax: (618) 539-9954 <br />Copy of the io��egoing mailed to all Coun�el <br />of Record, Water Referee, Div ' eer <br />and State Engineer Date �; ` <br />�- a..t:.L <br />Qeputy Clerk. Water Div. 5 <br />�i <br />' I <br />' I <br />'I <br />'I <br />' <br />'I <br />'I <br />'I <br />,I <br />'I <br />'I <br />'I <br />' I <br />' I <br />' I <br />' I <br />�I <br />C <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.