Laserfiche WebLink
08-27-2004 03:38PM FROM-DOL NATURAL RESOURCES 3038663558 T-045 P.003/008 F-067 <br />85; P.?d 500 (Colo. npp. 1994). Nothinq presciiicd by Upper Gunnison Kivcs risc to any <br />rt:asc»1abic ILIueslioi, regLu•dinb .lu'tic-? Fiobbs' ability tu I1tirly wucl objectively dzten»inz <br />the lc??al issues pre!??nted i?t this case. Here, thC alleg?ttions do nnt supporL a <br />Jisqu311ticatioai anti the Mution shauld be denied. <br />tt. APPi,1CAliLE LAW DOrS RT:QL]11tE D1SQUAL.irIC'A'1'ION Wf1F-RE A <br />.lirnGE'S IMPAhTlAf.1'1'Y MYCHT 8E REASQNABY.'Y QIJESTIUNEI), BU'1' <br />7'1-1N RV IS N4 Rl?aSONABLE REASON HERE FOR DiSQUAl.1FiCA'TION. <br />LTpper GuM?ison"s argument reStS un a coriclusory allegation that .fualicC Hubbs <br />musr be Wased by virtue of his prior represenlaiion Of ihe Northern Coaorado WaTL;r <br />Conscrva.ncy I)istrict ("NurthCrn") ancl his participation in the 1992 case City ot <br />rl'honnon v_ City o,'Fon Lollins, 830 P.2d 915 (Cnlu_ 1992). ln suppor[ of ihis <br />eorlieutiocl, Upper vunniscm puinis tC) _Tustiee i-lobbs' decisian nut tu partieipate in The <br />Golden, Vail, and 13reckenriclbe cascs, which were ccmaiaercd by this Catirt togzthei-. <br />Wz River <br />S}alc.Eri?LiriC2r v. (.ioldell, 69 N. 33d 1027 (Colo. 2UU3); S1ctle E11L117i:f V. Eap <br />Wazer anci Sanitation Dist., 69 P.3d 1028 (Culu. 2003) ("Vail"); State b-'riginzer v. Tqwri <br />of Breckenricige, 69 P.3d 1028 (C'.olo. 20033). Jusiiee llobbs has Cxplziined tlzai "it was a <br />no brainer" to rzcu;C hilnscll because aFliis past associarion wiLh lyorihern, an artlicus or <br />party iji the Ga1dei,, Vztil atid_Brcekenridge cascs.' (Movant's I;:x. P Gtt ?). Howevcr, <br />' f f Tusiicc Eiobbs did naG havu past assncizztion with aci m»icus or party in ihL: <br />ColaCn, Vail and lirecl:enri??gk? cases, his mzre participaiian in kin onrlii?r ca-se should 1wi <br />1?avz hezn clzc Uasi-; for r2etisal. "[N]one oFtre fornzcr Justiees of Lhis Court -Sincz 191l <br />have lo)lowed 1 piaclicz of disnualiFying thzmszlves in caszs involvins point5 0l Iaw <br />with ruspcet to wliicll they had expressed an opinion or forniulated policy prior to <br />ascen0ing w thc b?;nch." Laird,v_. Tatum, 409 U.S. 824, 927 (1972). "Sincz muSt lusticzs <br />corrie to this bencl-, nu aarlier tlla.il their nziddle yeara, it would be 111nisual il' They had not <br />by ihat itme formulated at least sonie tentative nolions which woula intluence tlletn in <br />their intetprctatior. oi t11e swcuping clauses of the Constitulion and their inivraction with <br />one anatliex." Id_ _ii 835. -'It would he noi mzrely unusual, but cxiraardinaty, if iYizy had