PERMFILE127103 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

r 8.B. In response to Paragraph 8.B. (numbered 7.B.) of the Cross Claim, Clear Creek denies all of the allegations of that Paragraph. S.C. In response to Paragraph 8.C. (numbered 7.C.) of the Cross Claim, Clear Creek denies all of the allegations of that Paragraph. 8.D. In response to Paragraph 8.D. (numbered 7.D.) of the Cross Claim, Clear Creek denies all of the allegations of that Paragraph. 9. Any allegations not expressly admitted in Clear Creek's Answer to the Cross Claim are hereby denied. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES Clear Creek asserts the following affirmative defenses in response to the Cross Claim: 1. The Cross Claim fails to state a claim on which this Court may grant relief. 2. On information and belief, Cross Claimant Black Hawk -Central City Sanitation District failed to exhaust its administrative remedies. For this reason and others, Cross Claimant lacks standing to bring the claims asserted in the Cross Claim. 3. Cross Claimants claims are barred by the doctrines of waiver and estoppel. 4. Cross Claimants claims are without merit, because the MLRB's decision was made after a proceeding conducted in compliance with statutory and regulatory requirements, at which the MLRB received and deliberated upon substantial evidence in the record of the proceedings. 5. Clear Creek may add or withdraw affirmative defenses as warranted by proceedings in this case. PRAYER FOR RELIEF For the reasons set forth above, Clear Creek requests that this Court enter an Order dismissing this Cross Claim, with prejudice, and affirming the Order of the MLRB. Clear Creek asks that the Court, to the extent permitted bylaw, award it its attorneys fees and costs, and to grant it such other relief as it deems just and proper. BJORK LINDLEY LITTLE PC Original signature on file at the ofrices of Bjork Lindley Little PC /s/ Christonher G. Haves Christopher G. Hayes 3