Laserfiche WebLink
7198460159 <br />JIM TATLJM <br />PAGE 06 <br />MAR/1(i/2D07/FRl 12:05 PM -OI OSM tMR DENVER . FAX No, 3D3 844 145D F. 036 . <br />~- : , <br />I. <br />..: <br />I ,. ;. <br />house was outside the area 1'kety to be affecied by, coat mining subsidence; using even <br />rottser'vative assumptions eonCetning ttte angle of draw and amount of ceai removal. 151 <br />SSI,A a! ?92 93, 29G. <br />The cottsultaota hired by the Tatums rnnld net state with Certainty that coal mine <br />i <br />subsidence cvttsed damagge m the Tatum residence. The strongest statement supporting.the <br />Tatum's view came from William t, Attwnait: "Evidence does got exist to categaricaliy <br />attnbute damage to a specific cause; therefore, judgment has to be applied. Cottsiderting fhe . <br />posat"bla ceases of damage, it is our opinion that the surface movements due to coal <br />subsidence area likely mason far the damage." Id: st 294. Two other eonsuttattts hired.hy <br />rite Tatgms agreed that coal mina subsidence'"could have caused the problem" or that the <br />conditions of t'he home were °consistent with, that explanation." ~, ar 29A-95. <br />ARer copsirlenimg the views of all theso oxperis, bath DMG and OSA+I detarntined that <br />damage to the Tatum tesidencn wne t~ reused by coal subsidence, aztd O$M detemtirted that <br />DMG. ltad, zespanded appropriately to the Tpp1, l„d. at 297. "lhe Tartans appealed tltis <br />decision to the IELP,. <br />Simultaneously with the ittvestigatians conducted by l)MG and QSlcl, the Tatums <br />sued 73asin iu Colorado state covet, seel®g recovery for damages for subsidence damage to <br />their residence, among other issues.r A t the end of that trial, ss noted by the IBI..A, the trial <br />Again, the other issues addressed in the state Court action are net relevant to the 110V at <br />issue in this 1#pplic~ation for Review, and tltcrefore will mot be discussed in this <br />Application. <br /> <br />-3- <br />