Laserfiche WebLink
to send a letter of rejection on behalf of the trust. Further , <br /> the trust never received statutory notice from Nottingham, nor was <br /> such statutory notice forwarded by Mr. Stemwedel to the trust <br /> (Stemwedel and Goldman Affidvadit) . The first discussions with Mr. <br /> Heifner and retained counsel for the trust, Mr. Goldstein, occurred <br /> just several days prior to the Board meeting on March 1 . Further , <br /> the application on file with the Eagle County Clerk and Recorder <br /> is incomplete and inaccurate (Stemwedel Affidavit) . <br /> II <br /> ARGUMENT <br /> A. PLAINTIFF ' S COMPLAINT STATES A CLAIM FOR RELIEF <br /> AGAINST WILLIAM E. NOTTINGHAM , INDIVIDUALLY. <br /> §24-4-106 (4) , C. R.S . 1973 requires that ''every party in <br /> the agency action not appearing as Plaintiff in such action for <br /> judicial review shall be made a Defendant. " Mr. William E. <br /> Nottingham was involved in dialogues with the Eagle River Trust <br /> and Robert Stemwedel concerning the Eagle pit operation (see <br /> Stemwedel and Goldman affidavits) . <br /> Mr. William E. Nottingham was present at, and was involved <br /> in the Board meeting on March 1 . The Plaintiff has not embarked on <br /> any discovery up to this point, and therefore is not in a position <br /> to concede or deny the nature and capacity of Mr. Nottingham' s <br /> actions in this matter. It is certainly premature at this point <br /> to conclude merely from the affidavit of Mr. Nottingham that he <br /> never acted on his own behalf in this matter and that he was not a <br /> proper party to be joined in this action. The question of whether <br /> or not Mr. Nottingham was involved personally is in large measure <br /> a legal determination and conclusions in his affidavit to the contrary <br /> are not appropriate. Further, the corporate structure of Nottingham <br /> Sand and Gravel Company has not been investigated by the Plaintiff . <br /> The possibility that the corporate veil of Nottingham Sand and Gravel <br /> Company should be pierced and Mr. Nottingham should be held as a <br /> responsible party in the actions allegedly undertaken on behalf of <br /> Nottingham Sand and Gravel Company is a matter which awaits Plaintiff ' s <br /> discovery and proper, informed ajudication by this Court. <br /> -2- <br />