My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2011-02-10_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - C1981008
>
Day Forward
>
General Documents
>
Coal
>
C1981008
>
2011-02-10_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - C1981008
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 4:30:55 PM
Creation date
2/21/2014 9:59:15 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981008
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Date
2/10/2011
Doc Name
Answer to Amended Complaint 2010 CV 367
From
Christopher Kamper, Craig R. Carver, Carver, Schwarz, McNab & Bailey, LLC
To
District Court, Montrose County, Colorado
Permit Index Doc Type
General Correspondence
Email Name
DAB
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
6
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).
View images
View plain text
soils' classification as prime farmland is dependent upon other relevant factors not stated in the <br />Amended Complaint. <br />13. WFC denies the allegations of paragraph 13 of the Amended Complaint, and <br />affirmatively states that the allegation of 190,000 tons of soil removed is incorrect and is lacking <br />any good faith basis in fact. <br />14. WFC denies the allegations of paragraph 14 of the Amended Complaint and <br />affirmatively states that it provided a complete soil survey to DRMS in 1998, showing clearly the <br />presence, location, and classification of Barx soils on the Premises. <br />15. WFC denies the allegations of paragraph 15 of the Amended Complaint. <br />16. WFC denies the allegations of paragraph 16 of the Amended Complaint. <br />17. WFC denies the allegations of paragraph 17 of the Amended Complaint. <br />18. WFC denies the allegations of paragraph 18 of the Amended Complaint. <br />19. WFC denies the allegations of paragraph 19 of the Amended Complaint. <br />20. WFC denies the allegations of paragraph 20 of the Amended Complaint. <br />21. WFC denies the allegations of paragraph 21 of the Amended Complaint. <br />22. WFC denies the allegations of paragraph 22 of the Amended Complaint. <br />PLAINTIFFS' PUTATIVE LEGAL CLAIMS <br />CLAIM ONE — ALLEGED BREACH OF CONTRACT <br />23. WFC incorporates its responses to paragraphs 1 through 22 of the Amended <br />Complaint as previously stated in reference to each such paragraph. <br />24. The allegations of paragraph 24 of the Amended Complaint contain a legal <br />conclusion, and WFC therefore denies them. <br />25. WFC denies the allegations of paragraph 25 of the Amended Complaint. <br />26. WFC denies the allegations of paragraph 26 of the Amended Complaint. <br />27. The allegations of paragraph 27 of the Amended Complaint contain a legal <br />conclusion and speculation as to the facts, WFC therefore denies them. <br />CLAIM TWO — ALLEGED VIOLATION OF COLORADO SCMRA <br />28. WFC incorporates its responses to paragraphs 1 through 27 of the Amended <br />Complaint as previously stated in reference to each such paragraph. <br />{00020579.2 1 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.