|
<br />~,
<br />1., <
<br />tn".'.
<br />00
<br />,-4
<br />i. :;'~)
<br />R P.osT
<br />
<br />
<br />4/ '
<br />(I~A~
<br />
<br />'3._
<br />
<br />Water firm usedcostlylitiption ,c
<br />to try to force settlement,'r6e~' say:
<br />
<br />' .'. .' . '. ' , . ", ',:- - ': .- ,:,~-: - ,';'-: '- - . -, ' --:~", '-"::;
<br />By Patrick O'Driscoll ditchc'lmpanies, state, federal and The hearing 'lffers a detailed
<br />Denver Post Steff Writer local g'lvernments" and private glimpse int!', the high-priced 'ftem
<br />ALAMOSA - With a blizzard 'lf citizens - 'h'lpes t'l reC'lver as 'lf water law. The day's fii'st WI!;-
<br />paperw'lrk and expensive, time- . much as $3 millionin.legal and ness, B'lulder water' lawyer R>i-
<br />c'lnsuming legal pl'lYs, American technical C'lsts amassed in a six- phaelM'lses, Wr\1ly 'n'ltedtha~:a
<br />Water Deve1'lpment Inc. tried t'l year fight 'lvefAWDl's BacaPr'lj- law firm's top'fees - his $225-8'0-
<br />st'lnewall and intimidate Its San ect, whicl:). 'W'luld pump and, pipe h'lurcharge, f'lr instance - l4:e
<br />Luis, Valley critics into giving up valley waters t'l the Fr'lnt Range tied t'l n'lthingm'lre than a slidiifg
<br />their fight against the c'lmpany's f'lr future municipal gr'lwth" , , scale upward fr'lm whatever t~e
<br />water-rights bid, an 'lPP'lsing law' After ,a six-week trial last fall, firm's new law-sch'l'll gradsma~f'
<br />yer suggested yesterday. Judge R'lbert Ogburn rejected ' ,Padd'lck, wh'l usually bills$I~5
<br />William Padd'lck, att'lrney f'lr AWDl's claim t'l the. water a$ n'ln- an' h'lur f'lr' his services, said 'he
<br />the Ri'lGrande Water Users AsS'l- tributary, 'lr unc'lnnected t'l sur- wrote 'lff ab'lut $87,000 inJees;,j;<>
<br />elati'ln, said the Denver"based ' face, waters. T,hec!,mpany is ap- the water users' gr'lup, becat!J!e
<br />firm's "disc'lvery wars" -a pealing t'l the U,S. Supreme C'lurt, tl:).ey were financially strapped'and
<br />drawn-out' bllttle oyer 'lPposition but still stands potentially liable his firm has "a stake in ,their CQD--
<br />'I / demands, t'lsee the, pr'lof behind for $500,000 in witness fees andtinued success, tbeir viabilitY;fls
<br />A WDl's scheme - reinf'lrced "'lur 'ltl:).er ,costs.' farmers and rancbers. ";;
<br />view that AWDI was trying t'l use But the fQcuS 'lithe hearirig, , Ogburn ruled yesterday that alty
<br />expensive litigati'lnto f'lrce a set- which resumes.t'lday, 1s, on m'lre ' state and federal lawyers' fees lfe-
<br />llement" 'lver its claim t'l as much than $2.5 milliQn in f'les' costs pre. imbllrsed will be at the same $lOll-
<br />as 60 billion gallons a year of val- paring!'lrll pari of the case that an-h'lur rate agreed to for private
<br />ley groundwater. AWDl dr'lPped at the lastminute. lawyers in thecase.AWDlbad'lb~
<br />Paddock testified yesterday, the Wlien Ogburn all'lwed AWDI t'l jected that government laWyers
<br />first day'in an unusual Alamosa 'lmit fr'lm kial its claim t'l the sl:).Q1!ld receive less, But Ogbll~n
<br />Water C'lurt hearing into h'lwwater as tributary, or connected to called the $100-an-bour fee "an e'X-
<br />much 'lf its QPP'lnents' attorriey surfacewater, he als'l ordered that tremely minimum range and eMi-
<br />and witness fees AWDI must pay., the, company reimburse what its ,nently reas'lnable"!n the complex
<br />A coalifi'ln 'lf "'lbjectors" - f'les spent on that specific issue. field Of water law. ,',
<br />
<br />~~,--
<br />'J';Jiilt!.,
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />,-- ',.,
<br />.'. .'."
<br />
<br />
<br />
|