Laserfiche WebLink
withstand the motion. The court also denied the motion as to <br /> NLGC's second claim. <br /> The parties then filed cross-motions for summary judgment on <br /> NLGC's as-applied due process claim. Applying Caperton, 556 U.S. <br /> at 884, the court concluded that Commissioner Donnelly's failure to <br /> recuse himself did not violate NLGC's due process rights. Thus, it <br /> denied NLGC's motion, granted the defendants' cross-motions, and <br /> entered judgment in favor of the defendants on NLGC's C.R.C.P. 57 <br /> claim on April 15, 2020. <br /> Having fully adjudicated NLGC's first claim, the court turned <br /> to NLGC's C.R.C.P. 106(a)(4) claim and set the case for oral <br /> argument. It also ordered the parties to file supplemental briefs <br /> addressing whether "the proposed concrete batch plant is not an <br /> `accessory use' to mining and is therefore prohibited under the <br /> [Land Use Code]." The parties did so. <br /> )o On June 8, 2020, after oral argument, the court issued an <br /> order in favor of NLGC. It determined that the Board erroneously <br /> found that section 4.3 of the Land Use Code — which includes <br /> several relevant provisions concerning "accessory uses" — was <br /> inapplicable. And that erroneous conclusion, it explained, led the <br /> 10 <br />