Laserfiche WebLink
D. To the Extent the December 2010 Order Is Based on Alleged Statutory <br />Violations, the Board Acted Contrary to Law by Relying on the Identical <br />Facts and Alleged Violations at Issue in the August 2010 Order 18 <br />III. The Order Is Contrary to Law Because Neither the August 2010 Order Nor the <br />December 2010 Order Clearly and Precisely Define the Conduct Required to <br />Comply 20 <br />IV. The Order Is Unlawful Because the Board Refused to Consider Cotter's Evidence <br />That Compliance with the August 2010 Order Was Impossible 25 <br />A. Introduction 25 <br />B. The Board Improperly Rejected Cotter's Attempt to Submit Evidence of <br />Impossibility 25 <br />CONCLUSION 26 <br />ii <br />