Laserfiche WebLink
72 <br />1 provides for civil actions by citizens, and this <br />2 is -- this is a provision of the statute that the <br />3 Tatums are invoking in this instance, and it is <br />4 34-33-135(6). <br />5 And it states in relevant part, "Any <br />6 person who is injured in person or property through <br />7 the violati on by an operator of any rule or <br />8 regulation promulgated under any order or permit <br />9 issued pursuant to this article may bring an action <br />10 for damages against such operator," and then it <br />11 goes to where he can bring the operate action. <br />12 It's clear that this statutory provision <br />13 allows the Tatums to go forward directly to court <br />14 at any time they want to, and in this particular <br />15 instance and as Mr. Anderson, I believe, <br />16 acknowledged, that's what they did last time when <br />17 they alleged continuing subsidence damage or <br />18 subsidence damage. <br />19 Well, there's nothing in the statute <br />20 that requires them to pursue both of these at the <br />21 same time. They have elected to go forward, as <br />22 they're authorized to do by the statute, in a court <br />23 of law to make their determination -- or to make <br />24 their argument to the court. <br />25 The division has found itself in a <br />