Laserfiche WebLink
MID-CCNTINENT RESCU'RCES, INC. V LOGEY, 91 CV 17 <br /> OCTOBER 22, 1992 <br /> ' PAGE 6 <br /> MLRD in the form of a Settlement Agreement entered on April 11 , <br /> 1989 , is res judicata and bars the later WQCD proceedings . <br /> Therefore, the WQCD Findings , Ruling and Order are void. <br /> II . DISCUSSION <br /> MCR argues that res judicata bars the WQCD proceedings , <br /> because of the final order in the MLRD proceedings of April 11 , <br /> 1990 . The Court concludes that res judicata does indeed bar the <br /> WQCD proceedings , and that the WQCD Ruing and Order is void. <br /> Res judicata applies to administrative proceedings , as well as <br /> traditional court suits . <br /> While the doctrines of res judicata and <br /> collateral estoppel were developed in the <br /> context of judicial proceedings , it is now <br /> well settled that in a proper case they may be <br /> applied to administrative proceedings as well . <br /> Umberfield v. School Dist . No. 11, 185 Colo . <br /> 165 , 552 P . 2d 730 , 3 (1974) . <br /> Res judicata may therefore be applied to an administrative hearing, <br /> WheIden v. Board of County Comn 'rs, 782 P . 2d 853 (Colo . App . 1989) , <br /> and it operates to bar a second action on the same claim as one <br /> litigated in a prior proceeding when "there is a final judgment , <br /> identity of subject matter, claims for relief , and parties to the <br /> action. " City and County of Denver v. BIock 173, 814 P . 2d 824, 830 <br /> (Colo. 1991) . Each of these standards is • met here. <br /> First , there is a final judgment from MLRD. Its decision of <br /> April 11 , 1990 finally determined all the issues before it <br /> concerning unlawful discharges into the stream from Outfall No . <br />