Laserfiche WebLink
should stay the proceeding, permit the parties to conduct discovery on the limited issues related <br />to jurisdiction, and if necessary, hold an evidentiary hearing on the issues related to subject <br />matter jurisdiction. Trinity, 848 P. 2d at 925 (Colo. 1993). <br />When evaluating a motion to dismiss under C.R.C.P. 12(b)(5), a claim must be dismissed <br />if, accepting the allegations as true, it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of <br />facts in support of his claim that would entitle him to relief. Dunlap v. Colorado Springs <br />Cablevision, Inc., 829 P.2d 1286, 1291 (Colo. 1992). However, "the court need accept as true <br />only the plaintiffs well-pleaded factual contentions, not his conclusory allegations." Full Draw <br />Productions v. Easton Sports, Inc., 85 F.Supp.2d 1001, 1005 (D.Colo. 2000), quoting Hall v. <br />Bellmon, 935 F.2d 1106, 1110 (10th Cir.1991) (construing identical federal rule); see Public <br />Service Co. v. Van Wyk, 27 P.3d 377, 396 (Colo. 2001) (Mullarkey concurring in part, dissenting <br />in part). <br />II. Plaintiffs Claim for Relief Does Not Satisfy the Requirements of C.R.C.P. <br />g(a)(2) <br />Pursuant to C.R.C.P. 8(a)(2), a pleading must set forth "a short and plain statement of the <br />claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief ..." Nowhere in Plaintiff s Complaint does he <br />allege any facts with respect to the conduct of the Division. Plaintiff alleges the Division <br />violated certain provisions of the Surface Coal Mining Reclamation Act, §34-33-101, et seq. <br />However, nowhere in Plaintiff s Complaint does he allege what provisions of that Act were <br />violated, nor how the Division's acts or omissions violated those provisions. Plaintiff s <br />Complaint fails to put the Defendant on notice of the conduct he alleges caused him harm and <br />4