Laserfiche WebLink
Rules and Regulations governing Prime Farmland, landowners' rights and protection under the <br />law." [Complaint, ¶5]. Plaintiff alleges the Defendant has caused "irreparable" damages to his <br />land in the amount of $5,130,635.00. [Complaint, ¶6]. However, to the extent the claims lie in <br />tort or could lie in tort, these claims must be dismissed. This set of alleged facts does not <br />comport with any of the waived areas of the CGIA. C.R.S. §24-10-106. Thus, the claims <br />against the Defendant must be dismissed. See Desert Truck Sales, Inc., 837 P.2d at 765; Arabasz <br />v. Schwartzberg, 943 P.2d 463, 465 (Colo. App. 1996) (claims based on negligent <br />misrepresentation are tort claims barred by the CGIA). <br />IV. Plaintiff Cannot State a Claim for Deprivation of Due Process with Respect <br />to Their Property Against the Division <br />Plaintiff asserts that the Defendant Division of Mining and Reclamation violated his <br />rights as a landowner, and in doing so, caused him "irreparable damages." [Complaint, ¶5]. To <br />the extent that Plaintiff attempts to state a claim in his Complaint for deprivation of property <br />without due process of law, in violation of the United States Constitution, this claim is barred by <br />the Eleventh Amendment of the Constitution. <br />Claims alleging violations of the due process clause of the United States Constitution are <br />brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. However, the State of Colorado - here the Department of <br />Natural Resources - Division of Mining and Reclamation, is not a "person" subject to liability <br />for damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. See Will v. Michigan Dept. of State Police, 109 S. Ct. <br />2304, 2312 (1989); Griess v. State of Colorado, 841 F.2d 1042, 1044 (10th Cir. 1988). Plaintiff <br />is not seeking injunctive or declaratory relief against the Division, but rather are seeking <br />damages only. Such claims are barred by the Eleventh Amendment. Will, 491 U.S. at 65-66. <br />6