ENFORCE27705 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

FwwNw J Wooowow III III IIII II IIII III V~ctow T. RoueMaw 999 TELEPF.oNE (303) 249-4531 M..wa..wET L. C~REV TEL.ECORER (303) 2493102 WOODROW, ROUSHAR & CAREY ATTORNEYS AT LAW P.O. Boa 327 144 $OIITX IINCCM.P ~NGFE AVENVE MONTRO$E. COLORADO 81402-0327 June 16, 1994 /~~ Mr. J. David eed Attorney at aw P. O. Box 96 Montrose Colorado 81402 Dear David: I have take the liberty of ordering a copy of the Stipulation which was placed of record on April 14, 1994. A copy thereof is enclosed for your immediate reference. As you will notice, the only obligation with respect to reclamation assumed by Abbott/Watson related to any remedial work required until the permit was transferred. As suggested in my letter of June 6, 1994, the transfer signed by Ruth Abbott was sent to your office on May 24, 1994. The reclamation work currently required by the Mined Land Reclamation Board relates to termination of the project and is required only because your client did not continue to remove gravel from the project and apparently is not now contemplating a transfer of the permit to Mr. Brill. As you may recall, throughout the litigation process, or. various occasic~s, motions were filed with the Court which complained of Ruth Abbott removing valuable products from the property which was to be acquired by Mr. Brill. Presumably removal of those products made the property less valuable to Mr. Brill. I can only assume these complaints contemplated that Mr. Brill would be selling gravel from the property. We had no idea whatsoever that your client contemplated closing down the operation by way of reclamation. If that was his intent, there would have been no reason to have complained about removal of gravel while the case was being considered by the Court. Once again, I will extend, on behalf of my client, a willingness to cooperate with Mr. Guffey in reclaiming the property, but necessary financial arrangements will be required