PERMFILE41125

• Permit No: M1980143
• IBM Index Class Name: Permit File
• Doc Name: CROSS MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

2. The order of the board authorizing issuance of
the mining permit was supported by the overwhelming weight
of evid~ance.
EB(;LMEyI
I.
THE ALLEGED PROCEDURAL ERRORS AT THE
AGENCY LEVEL WERE NOTHING MORE THAN
MINOR IRREGULARITIES NHICH (1) MERE
FULLY WAIVED BY PLAINTIFFS; (2) DID
NOT PREJUDICE THE PLAINTIFFS IN THE
SLIGHTEST DEGREE; AND (3) WERE NOT
JURISDICTIONAL. PLAINTIFFS HAVE NOi
EVEN ASSERTED THAT THE ALLEGED IRREGU-
LARITIES CAUSED THEM ANY PREJUDICE.
THEREFORE PLAINTIFFS• CLAIMS ARE HYPO-
THETICAL AND SPECULATIVE AND MUST BE
DENIED.
Plaintiffs assert the existence of the following four
procedural errors:
1. Plaintiffs assert codefendant Spillers was required
to commence publication of notice of the filing of his appli-
cation for a permit within ten days after its filing. In
this case the first publication was made August 6, 1980
whereas filing occurred July 25r 1980. Plaintiffs cite
C.R.S. 1973s 34-32-112(10)(b) in support of their position
that this procedural defect requires revocation of permit.
-4-