Laserfiche WebLink
i <br />brought in court for4amages caused by subsidence from Basin Resources' <br />mining operation. (This case will be discussed below). <br />The parties waived claims "in any way related to or arising from the <br />Litigation." The settlement agreement states that the waivers were intended <br />to resolve the NOV !and all matters and proceedings arising directly from the <br />NOV. The waivers idid not include claims in regard to the case of Tatum v. <br />Basin Resources (01 CV 26) for subsidence damage, any collateral <br />proceedings related to such lawsuit, claims related to mining activities <br />unrelated to the Litigation or any claims regarding matters excluded from the <br />waivers. <br />Pursuant to the agreement, Basin Resources paid $30,000 to the Tatums to <br />satisfy the award of costs and expenses in 01 CV 038. Basin also dismissed <br />its appeals in 02 CA; 1915 (appeal of 01 CV 038) and 03 CA 0039 (appeal of <br />costs award). The Board and Division dismissed their cross appeal in 02 CA <br />1915. <br />I <br />Thus, the settlement agreement resolved remaining litigation matters <br />concerning the temporary relief order that was made into a final judgment <br />and the Tatums' cost award, but did not preclude the Division from pursuing <br />enforcement actions !in the future including the current NOV. Prior to the <br />time of the settlement agreement, the Board had reconsidered its April 10, <br />2001, order reinstating the NOV and had issued its June 11, 2001, order <br />upholding the Division's authority to vacate the NOV without prejudice; the <br />trial court had granted the Tatums' motion to dismiss Basin Resources' <br />complaint for judicial review of the Board's June 11 order based on the <br />company's lack of standing, among other reasons; and Basin Resources <br />voluntarily dismissed its appeal of the trial court's dismissal of its judicial <br />review case. <br />Thus, prior to the time of the settlement agreement, the issue of the <br />Division's authority to vacate the NOV without prejudice was finally <br />decided. The issue was already resolved by the court in favor of the Division <br />and Board. The settlement agreement did not affect this final ruling. <br />Rather, it merely resolved remaining appeals by Basin Resources and the <br />State concerning the temporary relief order that was made final and the <br />court's award of costs against Basin Resources. This is why the Division's <br />March 2001 vacation of the NOV without prejudice and the Board's June <br />11, 2001, order upholding the Division's authority to vacate without <br />I <br />12