Laserfiche WebLink
All remaining personal property is subject to the "exclusive sales agency' <br /> of M&E/King and the terms and conditions affecting sales set forth in the M&E/KtNG <br /> CONTRACT. <br /> The Carbondale Loadout site has been appraised by William T. Van Court, <br /> Denver, Colorado,in accordance with proper appraisal practices. <br /> The Coal Basin Preparation Plant Site and the Coke Oven Tract has been <br /> valued according to proper appraisal practices by Nash/Johnson Associates, Inc. <br /> Interrogatory No. 26 . Identify the person(s) who had the authority to act on <br /> behalf of the Creditors'Trust in regard to the Settlement Stipulation entered by MCR,Louis <br /> LaGiglia and Pitkin County on January 28, 1998. <br /> Response to Interrogatory No. 26. Louis M. LaGiglia, Creditors' Trustee. <br /> Interrogatory No. 27. State the basis for the allegation, pleading, statement, <br /> belief or contention in the Defendants'Amended Answer and Counterclaims(nos.115-118) <br /> that Pitkin County is precluded from collecting taxes assessed against real or personal <br /> property subject to MCR's liquidation plan because of collateral estoppel and laches. <br /> Response to Interrogatory No.27. MCR objects to this interrogatory.All issues, <br /> other than the three "reserved issues" (none of which are involved in the foregoing <br /> interrogatory), between Pitkin County and MCR are disposed of by the Settlement <br /> Stipulation, dated January 28, 1998, the subject matter of a motion to approve the same, <br /> dated January 29, 1998, and the Court's Order of approval entered February 23, 1998; <br /> therefore, with the Court's approval of the Settlement Stipulation, all issues other than the <br /> "reserved issues" are dismissed with prejudice and no longer a part of this litigation. The <br /> interrogatory is not relevant; further it calls for a legal conclusion. <br /> Interrogatory No. 28. State the basis for the allegation, pleading, statement, <br /> belief or contention in Defendants'Amended Answer and Counterclaims(no.120-126)that <br /> Pitkin County made improper tax assessments as to personal property subject to MCR's <br /> liquidation plan and the Eimco Shop Building. <br /> Response to Interroggatory No. 28. At the time the allegations in Defendants' <br /> amended answer paragraphs 123-126 were made, it was Defendants' belief that Pitkin <br /> County continued to assess and tax the so-called Eimco Shop after it had been destroyed, <br /> collapsed by snow accumulations,in February 1993. <br /> MCR RESPONSES TO <br /> C[vrL No.97 cv 131-3 -22- DMG INITIAL DISCOVERY <br />