My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE114773
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
200000
>
PERMFILE114773
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 10:10:53 PM
Creation date
11/25/2007 12:03:42 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M2004067
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
12/8/2005
Doc Name
City of Black Hawks Response to CCDWPs Motion to Deny Party Status & Strike Objections Witnesses
From
City of Black Hawk
To
DMG
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
14
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
and C.M.R. 2.8.1(2) expand this definition to also include evidence "not admissible under such <br />rules" with a "probative value commonly accepted by reasonable and prudent people in the conduct <br />of their affairs." This administrative standazd is consistent with a ruling by the Colorado Supreme <br />Court in Industrial Claims Appeals Office v. Flower Stop Marketing Corp., 782 P.2d 13, <br />18 (Colo.1989) in which the court stated as follows: <br />the use of heazsay evidence alone does not violate due process <br />principles as long as the hearsay is sufficiently reliable and <br />trustworthy and as long as the evidence possesses probative value <br />commonly accepted by reasonable and prudent persons in the conduct <br />of their affairs. Such heazsay can constitute substantial evidence to <br />support an administrative agency's decision in cases where the <br />hearsay is admitted under the provisions of the APA or other statutory <br />language equivalent to the APA. <br />The City will show that all of its proffered exhibits meet or exceed the required standazd. <br />The rule most applicable to the admission of testimony by experts in civil actions in district <br />courts is C.R.E. 702. It reads as follows, and again, it is more stringent than the standard made <br />relevant to the Board by C.M.R. 2.8.1(2): <br />If scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the <br />trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, <br />a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, <br />training, or education, may testify thereto in the form of an opinion or <br />otherwise. <br />In applying this rule, courts are given wide discretion and do not require an expert to have <br />been previously qualified as an expert or to have specific degrees, designations, certifications, or <br />memberships. Colorado Albert Club v. Board of Assessment Appeals, 719 P.2d 371, 374 (Colo. <br />App. 1986), rev'd on other grounds by 762 P.2d 146 (Colo. 1988). The City will show that all of its <br />expert witnesses aze qualified as experts by knowledge, skill, experience, training and/or education. <br />11 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.