Laserfiche WebLink
nonparty must be joined if complete relief cannot be accorded in <br /> his absence, or if he claims an interest relating to the subject <br /> of the action. Here, Resources has not moved to intervene in <br /> this action and has agreed not to do so. It is not for the de- <br /> fendants to act on behalf of, or represent, Resources concerning <br /> any interest that Resources may have. <br /> Lastly, this court has the ability to prevent any concern <br /> about inconsistent obligations by entering the appropriate <br /> relief. As stated earlier, the plaintiff does not seek double <br /> recovery. The defendants' claim that Resources is an indispens- <br /> able party simply fails. <br /> E. THERE IS NO IMPOSSIBILITY OF PERFORMANCE OF THE REQUESTED <br /> RELIEF. <br /> The defendants' last argument is their assertion that they <br /> cannot comply with the reclamation schedule entered by the Board <br /> because the dates for performance have passed. Such argument is <br /> absurd. Of course the plaintiff does not seek to transport the <br /> defendants into the past to perform the reclamation. The com- <br /> plaint does not provide specific dates for performance, but <br /> rather requests that these defendants perform the reclamation <br /> ordered by the Board. <br /> Moreover, if there was some sort of impossibility of per- <br /> formance of reclamation, then the appropriate remedy would be to <br /> order these defendants to pay for reclamation. The defendants' <br /> argument simply fails. <br /> For the foregoing reasons, the plaintiff requests that this <br /> Court deny the defendants' Motion to Dismiss. <br /> GALE A. NORTON <br /> Attorney General <br /> STEPHEN K. ERKENBRACK <br /> Chief Deputy Attorney General <br /> TIMOTHY M. TYMKOVICH <br /> Solicitor General <br /> PATRICIA S. BANGERT <br /> Deputy Attorney General <br /> -10- <br />