My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2017-12-21_PERMIT FILE - M2017049 (105)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Permit File
>
Minerals
>
M2017049
>
2017-12-21_PERMIT FILE - M2017049 (105)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/12/2021 2:02:30 AM
Creation date
12/21/2017 1:00:17 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M2017049
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
12/21/2017
Doc Name
Objection
From
Steven Mulliken
To
DRMS
Permit Index Doc Type
Objection Received
Email Name
AME
Media Type
D
Archive
No
Tags
DRMS Re-OCR
Description:
Signifies Re-OCR Process Performed
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
36
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
Administrative agency decisions are presumptively valid. Colo. Div. of Ins. <br /> v. Auto-Owner's Ins. Co., 219 P.3d 371, 376 (Colo. App. 2009). All reasonable <br /> doubts as to the correctness of administrative orders must be resolved in favor of <br /> the agency. City and County of Denver v. Bd. Of Adjustment, 55 P.3d 252, 254 <br /> (Colo. App. 2002). The party challenging an administrative agency's action bears <br /> the burden of overcoming the presumption that the agency's acts were proper. Id. <br /> A court must defer to the views of administrative agencies that are <br /> authorized to administer and enforce particular laws. Coffman v. Colorado <br /> Common Cause, 102 P.3d 999, 1005 (Colo. 2004). While the court determines <br /> questions of law, agency construction of a statute should be given appropriate <br /> deference. Id. <br /> Findings of evidentiary fact may not be set aside on review unless they are <br /> contrary to the weight of the evidence. Colo. State Bd. of Nursing v. Lang, 842 <br /> P.2d 1383, 1387 (Colo. App. 1992). The Board determines the weight and <br /> credibility of the evidence. Chostner v. Colo. Water Quality Control Comm'n, 327 <br /> P.3d 290, 297 (Colo. App. 2013). A reviewing court may not reweigh evidence or <br /> substitute its own judgment for that of an agency. Microsemi Corp. of Colo. v. <br /> Broomfield County Bd. of Equalization, 200 P.3d 1123, 1125 (Colo. App. 2008). <br /> Agency findings may be express or implied from a reading of the entire <br /> record. Colorado Office of Consumer Counsel v. Publ. Utilities Comm'n, 786 P.2d <br /> 10 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.