My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1999-01-20_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - C1981017
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
General Documents
>
Coal
>
C1981017
>
1999-01-20_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - C1981017
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/15/2021 10:59:10 AM
Creation date
5/3/2012 9:34:29 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981017
IBM Index Class Name
GENERAL DOCUMENTS
Doc Date
1/20/1999
Doc Name
Fax, cpy of court document called "motion to strike"
From
Burns, Figa & Will, P.C.
To
Cheryl Linden
Permit Index Doc Type
General Correspondence
Media Type
D
Archive
No
Tags
DRMS Re-OCR
Description:
Signifies Re-OCR Process Performed
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
11
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Fax:3038663558 .fan 20 '99 12:50 P.09 <br /> OI/19199 1$:33 FAX 3037962747 <br /> BURNS FLGA & WILL �DO7ttl11 <br /> Section 4.3 of the Regulations of the Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Board for Coal Mining- <br /> consists of 23 pages regulating construction and reclamation of roads at coat.mines. Like Oborne, <br /> pitkin County is attempting to regulate in an area prracmptcd by the state. <br /> The fourth claim for relief is breach of duty of good faith and fair dealing generally <br /> questioning DMG's use of the bankruptcy funds, whether it has generally complied with the <br /> hankmptcy pion and whether it has complied.with its own rules and guidelines governing the type <br /> of reclamation that it has uradcrrakcn. While the County may have an interest in what uses are made <br /> of the private property in Coal Basin following reclamation,it is clear that claims one through four <br /> relate solely to issues governed by the Colorado Surface Coal. Mining Reclamation Act and <br /> therefore,the County is barred from attempting to cxcrcise its powers in this area See, also,Board <br /> of County Commissioners of La Plata Cotarly v Bowen/Fdwards Associates, fne., 830 P.2d 1Q45, <br /> 1059(Colo. 1992)where the court stated that preemption by operational conflict can occur where <br /> assertion of a local interest would materially impede or destroy the state interest. <br /> Finally, DMG agrees that it is the agency with reclamation authority. In its Response to <br /> Motion for Leave,to File and Serve a Supplemental Pleading and to Join Additional Parties dated <br /> November 6, 1998,DMG reserves its right to defend its reclamation authority in this matter. <br /> B. Any notice and eom went provisions is the statute do not give Pitkin County the <br /> right to litigate claims one through four. <br /> The Colorado Surface Coal Mining Reclamation Act allows for public comment on permits <br /> and reclamation plains under certain circumstances. Pitlan County atterrxpts to assert an interest <br /> under these provisions, but fails here too. To the extent changes in the reelamation plait become an <br /> issue in this litigation,the County cannot them argue it has a right to comment Lulder the statute. For <br /> 6 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.