My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City of Colorado Springs v. David White November 1998
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
5001-6000
>
City of Colorado Springs v. David White November 1998
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/13/2012 8:51:56 AM
Creation date
7/12/2012 4:20:08 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
Description
City of Colorado Springs v. David White November 23 1998. No. 97SC685
State
CO
Date
11/23/1998
Title
City of Colorado Springs v. David White November 1998
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Court Documents
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
17
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
967 P.2d 1042, City of Colorado Springs v. White, (Colo. 1998) <br />361VI Construction and Operation <br />361VI(A) General Rules of Construction <br />361k222 Construction with Reference to <br />Common or Civil Law. <br />Statutes are not presumed to alter the common law <br />unless they expressly, or by necessary implication, <br />provide for such alteration. <br />[25] Statutes <�;-222 <br />361 - - -- <br />361 VI Construction and Operation <br />361 VI(A) General Rules of Construction <br />361k222 Construction with Reference to <br />Common or Civil Law. <br />A statute is merely cumulative of the common law <br />if the legislature intended not to interfere with <br />preexisting rights, but to give additional relief. <br />[26] Records X65 <br />326 - - -- <br />326II Public Access <br />326II(B) General Statutory Disclosure <br />Requirements <br />326k61 Proceedings for Disclosure <br />326k65 Evidence and Burden of Proof. <br />As it does in the discovery context, the <br />government entity asserting the privilege has the <br />initial `burden of proof in response to a public <br />records request, and must compile a proper Vaughn <br />index with supporting affidavits. <br />[27] Records <� 52 <br />326 - - -- <br />326II Public Access <br />326II(B) General Statutory Disclosure <br />Requirements <br />326k52 Persons *1042 Entitled to Disclosure; <br />Interest or Purpose. <br />The particular purpose for which one seeks a <br />public record under the open records laws is not <br />relevant in determining whether that record is <br />protected under the governmental deliberative <br />process privilege, since the open records laws only <br />require disclosure of materials which would be <br />routinely disclosed in discovery. West's C.R.S.A. § <br />24- 72- 202(6)(a)(I). <br />[28] Records X57 <br />326 - - -- <br />326II Public Access <br />326II(B) General Statutory Disclosure <br />Requirements <br />326k53 Matters Subject to Disclosure; <br />Exemptions <br />Page 5 <br />326k57 Internal Memoranda or Letters; <br />Executive Privilege. <br />Once the government has met its burden of <br />proving that a public record is protected by the <br />governmental deliberative process privilege by <br />satisfying the procedural requirements, the <br />privileged material is beyond public inspection. <br />West's C.R.S.A. § 24- 72- 202(6)(a)(I). <br />[29] Appeal and Error X961 <br />30 - - -- <br />30XVI Review <br />30XVI(H) Discretion of Lower Court <br />30k961 Depositions, Affidavits, or Discovery. <br />The Supreme Court reviews the trial court's <br />discovery rulings pursuant to an abuse of discretion <br />standard. <br />[30] Records X57 <br />326 - - -- <br />326II Public Access <br />326II(B) General Statutory Disclosure <br />Requirements <br />326k53 Matters Subject to Disclosure; <br />Exemptions <br />326k57 Internal Memoranda or Letters; <br />Executive Privilege. <br />Report prepared by outside consultant which <br />contained results of investigation of city community <br />services department was protected from disclosure <br />pursuant to open records request by governmental <br />deliberative process privilege. West's C.R.S.A. § <br />24- 72- 202(6)(a)(I). <br />*1045 Patricia K. Kelly, City Attorney, Stacy L. <br />Rouse, Assistant City Attorney - Employment, <br />Colorado Springs, for Petitioners. <br />John L. Maska, Colorado Springs, John Turner, <br />Colorado Springs, for Respondent. <br />Gale A. Norton, Attorney General, Martha <br />Phillips Allbright, Chief Deputy Attorney General, <br />Richard A. Westfall, Solicitor General, Patricia S. <br />Bangert, Director of Legal Policy, Casey Shpall, <br />Acting First Assistant Attorney General, Anthony S. <br />Trumbly, Assistant Attorney General, Natural <br />Resources Section, Denver, for Amicus Curiae State <br />of Colorado. <br />Inman Flynn & Biesterfeld, P.C., Joel A. Moritz, <br />Robert J. Thomas, Denver, for Amicus Curiae <br />Metro Wastewater Reclamation District. <br />Copyright (c) West Group 2001 No claim to original U.S. Govt. works <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.