Laserfiche WebLink
I. TRIAL COURT INFORMATION <br />COURT: District Court, Las Animas County, Colorado <br />JUDGE: Honorable Jesse Manzanazes <br />PARTY WITIATING THE APPEAL: Plaintiff. Basin Resources, Inc., a Colorado <br />corporation <br />TRIAL COURT CASE NUMBERS: 0]-CV-77, O]-CV-38 <br />AGENCY FROM WH]CH .IUDJCIAL REVIEW 1S SOUGHT: Colorado Mined Land <br />Reclamation Board <br />AGENCY CASE NUMBER: Notice of Violation No. CV-2000-0009 <br />Il. DESCR3PT]ON OF TAE NATURE OF THE CASE <br />Basin Resources, Inc. (Basin) brings this appeal to assure that it may address the <br />substance of the actions described below when in the contexts ofpending and likely future <br />motions far attorneys fees in this matter. <br />Basin operates the Golden Eagle Mine near Weston; Colorado. James ?arum and Amt <br />Tatum (the Tatums) own an adobe house near the mine. in October 2000, the Tatums initiated <br />administrative enforcement proceedings against Basin, alleging that subsidence from the Golden <br />Eagle Mine damaged their property. The Tatums had previously been awazded a money <br />iudgment against Basin Resources reflecting the diminished fair market value caused by <br />subsidence damage 1o their house. Based on the prior judgment, the Division of Minerals and <br />neology (Division) presumed that subsidence from the mine had again damaged the house, and <br />issued a Notice of Violation (NOV) to Basin, alleging a violation of the Colorado Surface Coa] <br />Mine Reclamation Act; Colo. Rev. Stat. F 3a.33-101; et seg. Basin timely petitio»ed the <br />Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Board (Board) for review of the NOV, and the Tatums <br />became parties to that proceeding- <br />In the initial stages of the $oazd proceedings: the Tatums attempted to limit the evidence <br />relating to subsidence which could be heard by the Boazd. The Boazd ruled against them. The <br />Tatums then sent a lever to the Division requesting that the NOV be'Zacated without prejudice." <br />The Division acquiesced, and vacated the NOV. <br />Basin preferred to adjudicate the NOv, as it had legal defenses to the claimed violation, <br />and wished to avoid a future enforcement action. Basin therefore filed a motion with the Board <br />asking that the Board find that the Division lacked authority to vacate the NOV, and that Basin <br />had a statutory right to a hearing before the Board on the NOV. The Board granted Basin <br />Resource's motion, and scheduled a hearing on the NOV. <br />-2- <br />9l9-d l20/E09'd BOB-! E99E999EOE E3JiiI10E3ii 1Y13I11tlN ~OlliY03d E9~91 1902-91-030 <br />