Laserfiche WebLink
<br />< <br /> <br />, , <br /> <br />5, Stipulations are appropriate in this type of circumstance where a party <br />stipulates or makes an agreement concerning a valuable property right. Moreover, the Court <br />should recognize such stipulation when such stipulation does not violate rules of public <br />policy. Kempter v. Hurd, 713 P.2d 1274 (Colo, 1986), Court approval of a stipulation is <br />especially appropriate in a case such as this where no questions of law are raised and where <br />the stipulation does not create manifest injustice. Bar 70 Enterprises, Inc. v. Tasca Corp" <br />703 P,2d 1297 (Colo. 1985); Lake Meredith Reservoir Co. v. Amiti Mut. Irri. Co., 698 P.2d <br />1340 (Colo. 1985), <br /> <br />6. Counsel for the CWCB has conferred with Andrew Peternell, Counsel for <br />the objector, who has consented to this Motion, <br /> <br />WHEREFORE the CWCB moves this Court to enter an Order approving the <br />Stipulation entered into between the CWCB and Trout Unlimited, and enter the attached <br />Findings and Ruling ofthe Referee and Decree of the Water Court, <br /> <br />Dated this 7th day of April, 2006, <br /> <br />JOHN W, SUTHERS <br /> <br />Attorney General <br />E-fiIed pursuant to C'.R.C'.P. 121. Duly signed original on file <br />......at the Office of the Attorney General. <br />~V:K$inia BrC:'!!1 <br /> <br /> <br />A , <br /> <br />Attorneys for CWCB <br />Counsel of Record <br />