My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REP31448
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Report
>
REP31448
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/25/2016 12:07:33 AM
Creation date
11/27/2007 5:55:39 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1981277
IBM Index Class Name
Report
Doc Date
2/17/1984
Doc Name
MEMO LOUKONEN V MLRB
From
AGO
To
MLRD
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.
/
4
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
J <br /> <br />DRAFT <br />Joseph C. French <br />French & Stone, P.C. <br />720 Pearl Street <br />Boulder, CO 80302 <br />RE: Loukonen v. Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Board, Civil <br />Action No. 82CV3312 <br />Dear Joe: <br />Enclosed is a proposed stipulation in the Loukonen case. <br />It incorporates in effect two of the points you proposed, <br />although not in the suggested terms. The two remaining points <br />our clients cannot agree to, for reasons I will explain below. <br />Since Judge Alexander has entered an opinion and judgement <br />in this case, it is of course in a different posture, simply <br />in terms of disposing of it, than is the usual situation <br />with stipulated settlements: I believe that paragraph three <br />of the stipulation should accomplish our mutual objective of <br />finalizing the judgment and terminating the litigation. I am, <br />however, open to alternative suggestions toward that end. <br />To respond specifically to your points: <br />1. Since judgment has entered, we do not believe a provision <br />releasing all claims concerning this litigation and penalty <br />is either necessary or appropriate. <br />2. Our clients cannot agree to a release regarding any <br />other penalties. If any violation had occurred, it would of <br />course be separate from and independent of the litigated <br />violation, and would involve violation not only of the <br />statutes but also of aboard order. We could not absolve the <br />Loukonens of any such violations. <br />3. I am informed by the Division that it does not have on <br />file a performance warranty covering the Loukonens' operation. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.