Laserfiche WebLink
DISTRICT COURT, WATER DIVISION 4 <br />MONTROSE COUNTY, COLORADO <br />1200 N. Grand Ave., Bin A <br />Montrose, CO 81401-3146 <br />CONCERNING THE APPLICATION FOR WATER <br />RIGHTS OF UPPER GUNNISON WATER <br />CONSERVANCY DISTRICT <br />IN GUNNISON COUNTY, COLORADO <br /> ? COURT USE ONLY ? <br />Attorneys for the State of Colorado: Case No. 02CW38 <br />KEN SALAZAR, Attorney General <br />SUSAN J. SCHNEIDER, Assistant Attorney General Div. /Crtrm. <br />Attorney Reg. No. 19961 * <br />LORI J. COULTER, Assistant Attorney General <br />Attorney Reg. No. 17766* <br />1525 Sherman Street, 5?' Floor <br />Denver, CO 80203 <br />Telephone: (303) 866-5046 & (303) 866-5072 <br />*Counsel of Record <br />MOTION IN LIMINE <br />The Colorado Water Conservation Board ("CWCB") and the State and Division <br />Engineers, (collectively, "the State"), through the undersigned counsel, hereby submit <br />this Motion in Limine to exclude the testimony of Jim Lochhead to the extent that it calls <br />for any legal conclusions concerning the legal definitions of "maximum utilization" and <br />"compact impairtnent" under section 37-92-102(6)(a)(I) &(V), C.R.S. (2002) and to <br />exclude the testimony of Eric Kuhn entirely because it was not properly disclosed and <br />because his opinions ultimately concern the legal definitions of "maximum utilization" <br />and "compact impairment," and as grounds therefore, state the following: <br />Failure to Provide a Written Expert Report or Summary and the Bases for the <br />Expert Opinion Constitutes Grounds for Excluding an Expert's Opinion <br />First, the State respectfully requests the exclusion of the expert testimony of Eric <br />Kuhn for the objector Colorado River Water Conservation District ("the CRWCD") <br />because the CRWCD failed to comply with the requirements of C.R.C.P., Rule 26(a)(2). <br />Specific statutes are not required to authorize a motion in limine, rather the <br />underlying power of the trial court to pass on the admissibility of evidence is inherent, <br />and is reflected in the rules goveming trial procedure. Good v. A. B. Chance Co., 565 <br />?? 0,