Laserfiche WebLink
MID-CONTINENT RESOURCES, INC. V LOOBY, 91 CV 177 <br /> OCTOBER 22, 1992 <br /> PAGE 7 <br /> 016 . MCR performed by paying a stipulated fine. <br /> Second, the subject matter of each proceeding was the same . <br /> Each proceeding dealt with unlawful discharges produced by mining <br /> operations from Outfall No . 016 into the stream. Stripped of the <br /> cumbersome technical jargon, the subject matter of each agency' s <br /> focus was the same . Each dealt with the same period of time, <br /> January and February, 1989; the same source of pollution, Outfall <br /> No . 016; the same general kinds of pollutants , TSS, TDS , oil , iron, <br /> and grease; the same damaged streams , Coal Creek and the Crystal <br /> River , ; the same operator , MCR; and the same general types of acts <br /> of omission and commission by MCR. <br /> The claims for relief originating from each agency were the <br /> same . MLRD sought civil penalties , and abatement and a clean-up . <br /> WQCD also sought civil penalties . Both agencies considered each <br /> day of violation to be a separate offense, subjecting the operator <br /> to additional civil penalties . Therefore, the factual basis for <br /> seeking relief and the relief sought was virtually identical in <br /> each proceeding . <br /> The parties to each action were the same . For purposes of res <br /> judicata and collateral estoppel , there is privity between officers <br /> of the same government , and acts of one agency of the government <br /> are acts of another agency, in this limited context . In Sunshine <br /> Anthracite Coal Co. v. Adkins, 310 U. S. 381 (1939) , the United <br /> States Supreme Court emphasized the substance over the form of how <br /> a government acts , stating : <br />