Laserfiche WebLink
contract and that the reclamation plan was incorporated into the <br /> liquidation plan. MCR and the Trustee then* allege that by <br /> conducting certain reclamation activities, the Division has <br /> violated the contract because the reclamation plan allegedly does <br /> not require certain reclamation activities . As to the fourth <br /> claim, MCR alleges that in every contract there is an implied <br /> covenant of good faith and fair dealing and the Division has <br /> violated that implied covenant . <br /> The Division has moved to dismiss all three of these contract <br /> claims . The liquidation plan is not a contract but a judgment . <br /> Accordingly, MCR and the Trustee fail to state claims upon which <br /> relief can be granted as to all three contract claims . In <br /> addition, these claims are, in essence, assertions that the <br /> Division is violating the Colorado Surface Coal Mining Reclamation <br /> Act ( "Reclamation Act" ) , and are not contract claims . As such, <br /> these claims are barred by the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act . <br /> The Division' s motion is pending before the district court . The <br /> O <br /> Division' s position, therefore, is that these three "contract" <br /> claims should be dismissed. <br /> Aside from the position taken in the motion to dismiss, the <br /> Division responds as follows to the second, third and fourth claims <br /> for relief : <br /> Second Claim for Relief <br /> MCR and the Trustee' s second claim asserts that by conducting <br /> steep slope reclamation on USFS land, the Division has violated the <br /> "contract" because the reclamation plan allegedly does not require <br /> 14 <br />