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 />b. Protesta�nt agrees to develop engineering cost esrimates of the proposed pzoject(s) <br />by July 31, 2006; and <br />c. Protestant agrees to develop a schedule for completion o� construction of the <br />proposed project(s) by July 31, 2006. <br />5. Concerning all other n�attezs imvo)vzz�g tkie Stipulation and Agreement dated <br />October 3 i, 2003 and first A.mended October ], 2004, the Protestant and Engineers re�zm all <br />other �arts of the agreement. <br />6. In a situatiox� suc� as this, when litxgants have settled their disputes by stipulauon, <br />it is appropriate for suc}� part�iies to fi1e stipulations with the Court. lt is further appropziate for <br />the Court to accept such stipulations or state solid reasons why the stipulatioza sk�ould not be <br />aecepted. Colorado River Water Conservation District v. Bar Forty ,Seven Co., 195 Cola. 478, <br />579 �.2d 636 (19'78); U.S v. Northern Coloradv Conservancy District, 608 �.2d 422 (l0�' Cir. <br />1979). <br />7. Stipulations aze appz�opr�ate in t}xis type o� circunnstance where a party stipulates <br />or makes an agreeme�nt cozzceming a va]uable �roperry righ� Moreover, the Cowct should <br />recognize such stipulation when such stipulation does not violate rules of public �olicy. Ke►npter <br />u Hurd, 713 P.2d 1274 (Colo. 1986). Cow�: approval of a stipulation is especially appropziate in <br />a case such as this where no questions of law are raised and where the stipulat�on does not create <br />manifest injustice. Bar 70 Enterprises, Inc. v. Tosco Corp., 703 P.2d 1297 (Colo. 1985); Lake <br />Meredith Reservoir Co. v. Amiri Mut. Irri. Co., 698 P.2d 1340 (Colo. 1985). <br />8. Counsel for the Protestant has conferred with cow�sel for the Engineers, who has <br />consented to this Motion. <br />WHEREFORE, the Protestant moves this Court to accept and approve the attached <br />Second Aznendment to Stipulation and Agreennent and make it an Order of the Court. <br />Uated this �'�. day o�' December, 2005 nunc �ro tunc October l, 2005. <br />FOR THE PROTESTANT: <br />Rosemazie Heidenreich Parker, #31750 <br />Attorney for Protestant <br />Po sox izs <br />Fxeebuzg,IL 62243 <br />(6l8) 539-9956 <br />Fax: (618) 539-9954 <br />' <br />r� <br />�� <br />'I <br />tl <br />' <br />'I <br />� <br />'I <br />'I <br />'I <br />� <br />�) <br />' I <br />, I <br />L <br />' <br />��� <br />' <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.