Laserfiche WebLink
From: $TEPHEN M.BROWN <br /> To: DOLL.AGWESTRA <br /> Subject- Press inquiries re Mid-Continent decision <br /> We have received several press inquiries regarding the recent Colorado Court of Appeals decision(unpublished) in <br /> Division of Minerals and Geology v_John Reeves,et al_, No_9SCA1382. This decision was issued an December 27, <br /> 1996_ The case involved an action by DMG against corporate officiers and agents of a coal company, Mid-Continent <br /> Resources, Inc_,which had declared bankruptcy. The action against these agents regarded reclamation of a coal <br /> mining site between Aspen and Glenw000d Springs. The state district court dismissed the action,holding that there <br /> was no Mined Land Reclamation Board order that the company had violated,and,therefore,any personal action <br /> against its agents was premature. in addition,the district court held that DMG was estoppel from raising its damage <br /> claim in the action—that DMG had to limit its damages claim to the amount it had required Mid-Continent to bond for <br /> while its permit was in effect and the amount the bankruptcy court had allowed for reclamation in the approved <br /> distribution plan_ <br /> That amount and the original permit bond amount was for$3,000,000,and the complaint originally alleged this <br /> amount of damages. However,more recent calculations by DMG for reclamation revealed that the actual <br /> reclamation could be much more. We then attempted to amend our complaint to include DMG's recalculated <br /> reclamation costs. <br /> We appealed the estoppel portion of the district court's decision. The court of appeals held that the district court's <br /> estoppel holding was unnecessary to its resolution of the case,that the estoppel issue was moot,and that it would <br /> not issue an advisory opinion on the estoppel issue. <br /> However,the court of appeals went on to state that the trial court's finding of estoppel"is unlikely to have a collateral <br /> estoppel or res judicata effect so as to have an impact on the future rights and liabilities of the parties" <br /> This office decided not to request a rehearing or petition for certiorari to the Colorado Supreme Court. <br /> Defendants in this action issued a press release yesterday noting that the appeals court had dismissed the appeal <br /> by DMG and stating that they had successfully argued that the suit was unnecessary because the bankruptcy <br /> proceedings were providing enough money for satisfactory reclamation at the site. <br /> DMG has received a press inquiry from the Aspen Times regarding the press release and directed the reporter to <br /> me. I informed him that I would have to receive clearance before I could talk to him about this matter. His deadline <br /> Is today. <br /> Joe Smith and I have discussed this and propose a response along the following lines: 'We hope that the <br /> Mid-Continent site can be reclaimed with monies from the bankruptcy proceedings. However,we note that the court <br /> of appeals was careful to state that neither the district court's nor its decislons on this case would preclude additional <br /> action by DMG against the agents of Mid-Continent should that become necessary_" <br /> If this statement is satisfactory to you,please advise me this afternoon so that I can contact the reporter today_ Joe <br /> suggested that,rather than calling the reporter back,we might want to issue a short press release along these lines <br /> and send it to this reporter and to other papers in the area(probably Glenwood Springs and Grand Junction) <br /> The reporter's name is Bob Ward with the Aspen Times,at 970-925-3414, Please advise. <br /> CC: NRSM ITJC <br /> 60tZ018 S££# ££:ST ZZ-10`L661 8SS£ 998 202 S3S =8nos:38 -1u8n1bN: W06A <br />