ENFORCE35557 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

SEP-27 6d 67:°6 F4Q"1:SYtJCOy_ 8-LLIII~» hIT 41~o2~r3369E ^0:3t','cY-137° r~.CE:65 5tr-Cf-L000 utu ut:~e rn nu~~t+nn ruwetc >_t:,rt. rtix n~. au~ ~aJ JC7[ r. ~~ ' ~ ~. ~ Plaintiffs James and Ann Tatum. hereinafter "TATT.JM" initiated this litigation by filing their complaint ae~ ct the Defendant Basin Rosourcos, Inc., hereinafter ",BRI". Tatum asserts the following claims: 1 First, that 13RI btrached a certain contract dated Lune 1, 1988 (Plaintiffs Exhibit I{JC, attached) wherein it (BItI) agreod to trade certain water rights. (Maxwoll Ditch trade), Second, that BRI bleached a certain oral agrcotnont catered into between the parties at 1 around the same time, to trade a second water right. (Consolidatod Ditch trads). Third, Tatum claims that underground mining operations conducted by the defendants have damaged chair property, including the residence alternatively n:ferrcd to during the trial u the "Erickson House", the "Tatum Residence", and "Solitarlo". Tatum claims that muting operations neaz or under their property caused substantial structural damage to the residence and that the cause was subsidence resulting from mining operations. Finally, Tantm asserts that 8RI further damaged their property by installing a ventilation shaft sad fan an their property which had the affect of causing a well on that portion of the property to dry up, sad also rendering a portion of his land unusable, Tatum also asserts claims for punitive damages, which the Court dismissed at the end of Plaintiffs' case, and for attorney fats. Defendant, while aclmowlcdging the onforcoability oftho June 1, 1988 Agreement, interprets the contract !n a ttranna different rhea Tatum; choir interpretation preventing the implementation of any agreement to exchange the uto of worst rights. Defendant also denies ~ existence of any agreement to convey water rights oa the Consolidated Ditch, denies causing any subsidence damage to plaintiffs property, and disagrees with Tatum as to the damages caused by use of their property !or construction of a certatn ventilation shaft. Agreement To Exchange Water Rip~tts-MBxwell_D~ch: In early 1988, Wyoming Fuel Company experienced underground production problems in their mining operations involving excess gas, excess water, and soft floors that severely threatened their ability to meet prod- uction and mine safety regttiretnents. Ill order to commence addressing those problems and in order to avoid a lengthy delay to obtain a permit. Wyoming Fuol Company negotiated with Tatum for waiver of a certain waiting pericd required by Colorado Revised Statutes 34-33-10t zt.seq. Wyoming Fuel Company entered into an Agreement w7th Tatum to exchange