Laserfiche WebLink
Notice of Violation or Cessation Order (Mar. 12, 2001) (attached as Exhibit A). <br />Basin appealed the decision of the Board and the Division to vacate the NOV, and that <br />appeal resulted in a settlement ageement between the Tatums, the Boazd, the Division and <br />Basin. The Settlement Agreement and Waiver of Claims, attached as Exhibit B, explicitly states <br />that the Tatums waive and release the Division, the Boazd and Basin from "~ known or <br />unknown claims which mi¢ht be asserted in the future whether based in statute, including but not <br />limited to the Colorado Surface Coal Mining Reclamation Act, Section 34-33-101, et s ., <br />C.R.S., and its implementing regulations and the Colorado Administrative Procedures Act, <br />Section 24-4-101 et s C.R.S., contract, tort, strict liability or other legal characterization in <br />any way related to or arising from the Litigation." Exhibit B at ¶ 1(b) (emphasis added). The <br />Division and the Board each provide a similar release to Basin. Id. at ¶ 1(c). The "Litigation" <br />refers to the original NOV and the related appeals. The "Litigation" does not refer to the judicial <br />proceeding brought by the Tatums that resulted in their judgment, proceedings collateral to that <br />judicial action, or futwe unrelated mining activities of Basin. See id. at 2-3. <br />In short, by withdrawing their eazlier citizen's complaint, by vigorously pursuing the <br />vacation of the original NOV, and by signing a broad release and waiver of claims, the Tatums <br />chose to pursue their remedies exclusively through the courts. The Tatums (and indeed this <br />Board and the Division) waived any right to pursue an enforcement action against Basin based <br />on the allegation that a second subsidence event affected the Tatum residence. Having made the <br />choice to terminate the original NOV -indeed, having made that choice in a legal binding <br />ageement -the Tatums may and must pursue fiuther enforcement of their judgment solely <br />through the courts. They cannot now attempt, in effect, to revive the settled NOV by a new <br />NOV directed only at enforcement of their judgment and, thus, haul the case back into the <br />-4- <br />