My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2017-04-24_REVISION - C1981041
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Coal
>
C1981041
>
2017-04-24_REVISION - C1981041
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/25/2017 7:32:24 AM
Creation date
4/24/2017 1:43:51 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981041
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
4/24/2017
Doc Name
Motion for Extension of Time to Supplement Exhibits with Rebuttal Expert Reports
From
Snowcap Coal Company
To
DRMS
Type & Sequence
TR69
Email Name
JRS
JHB
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.
/
9
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
Fontanari Parcels GVC Job No. 4,106, consisting of 71 pages with appendices <br />(the "GVC Report") <br />6. The Walter and GVC Reports disclose, for the first time, the opinions of their <br />respective authors concerning the sufficiency and appropriateness of the <br />investigations of Huddleston -Berry, and Fugro, and the repair and reclamation plans <br />proposed by Stover and Huddleston -Berry as part of TR -69. <br />II. ARGUMENT <br />A Legal Standards <br />C.R.S. § 24-4-105(4) and (7) provides the MLRB with wide discretion in the <br />administration of the Formal Hearing, including the admission of evidence. To that end, <br />SCC asks MLRB to consider C.R.C.P. 37(c)(1), which is utilized by Colorado District <br />Courts, and authorizes those courts to impose sanctions for violation the expert disclosure <br />requirements of C.R.C.P. 26(a)(2)(13)(1). Specifically, C.R.C.P. 37(c)(1) provides that "[a] <br />party that without substantial justification fails to disclose information required by C.R.C.P. <br />Rules 26(a) or 26(e) shall not, unless such failure is harmless, be permitted to present any <br />evidence not so disclosed at trial or on a motion made pursuant to C.R.C.P. 56." C.R.C.P. <br />37. Where a party fails to timely endorse an expert witness, as required by C.R.C.P. <br />26(a)(2), and the failure is not either substantially justified or harmless, the court acts within <br />its discretion when it precludes the expert from testifying. See Todd v. Bear Valley Vill. <br />Apartments, 980 P.2d 973, 978 (Colo. 1999). <br />The self-executing nature of C.R.C.P. 37(c) "recognizes that consistent enforcement <br />of sanctions is an essential component of an effective case management system and is <br />necessary not only to punish discovery violations in particular cases but also to deter <br />3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.