Laserfiche WebLink
A <br /> for injunctive relief, that the approval of the bankruptcy plan <br /> provided a source of funds to defray 'reclamation costs, and that <br /> the mine site did not pose a danger to the health and safety of <br /> the public. <br /> The Division then moved to amend its complaint, alleging for <br /> the first time that its estimated cost of reclaiming the mine <br /> site was "substantially in excess" of $3 million. This <br /> allegation was supported by an affidavit from the official <br /> involved with the reclamation project. <br /> At oral argument on the motions, defendants Contended that, <br /> by having filed a $3 million claim in the bankruptcy and by <br /> having approved the bankruptcy plan, the Division was estoppel <br /> from seeking a recovery in excess of $3 million. <br /> The trial court entered summary judgment of dismissal, <br /> finding defendants were not in violation of any Division orders <br /> and that the mine site did not pose a danger to the health, <br /> safety, or welfare of the public. The court further found that <br /> the Division was estopped from increasing its reclamation cost <br /> 1 <br /> estimate because defendants had relied on the earlier figure "by <br /> ordering their affairs with a view towards three million dollars <br /> in total liability for reclamation costs, to their detriment. " <br /> I. <br /> Defendants assert that this appeal is moot because the <br /> Division does not challenge the principal bases for entry of the <br /> summary judgment of dismissal. we agree. <br /> 3 <br /> 60/90'8 9££# tr£:ST Zz-T0`L66T 8SS£ 998 £0i oAs s3o8nos98 1tJ8f IbN: W08A <br />