 |
• Conservation
• Smart Growth
• Social
Justice
|
|
Conservation
 Spurious
Claims to Wilderness Inholdings Stymied
In 2001,
a massive litigation was filed in federal court
in Denver threatening critical lands in the Maroon Bells-Snowmass,
Hunter-Frying Pan and Collegiate Peaks wilderness areas. On the same
day, just as the statute of limitations was to expire, 53 spurious
cases were filed asserting ownership of
some 66 mining claim "inholdings" in areas where development (e.g.,
access roads, homes, lights, dogs) would destroy critical open space
and wildlife habitat and threaten historic routes of public trail access
(e.g., Conundrum Creek, American Lake, Independence, Lenado, etc.).
Almost immediately, Public Counsel engaged Denver environmental
lawyer Lori Potter to represent The Wilderness Society, Wilderness
Watch, Aspen Valley Land Trust and Aspen's Wilderness Workshop as intervenors
and amicus. Through careful investigation, public records revealed
that each of the claimants had purchased -- typically for a little
cash and with no title insurance -- deeds issued by or through
a convicted swindler. He had created "wild
deeds" to these old mining claims by reincorporating
new entities which used the identical name of long-abandoned and
dissolved corporate owners of these lands in an earlier era -- 50,
75 or even 100 years ago.
In May of 2004, Public Counsel helped Pitkin County secure favorable
rulings from the Colorado Supreme in the pivotal Timroth tax deed case
which gave Colorado trial courts the right to admit extrinsic proof
to explain a County's untimely sale of property -- decades earlier
-- for delinquent taxes or to explain the untimely issuance of the
treasurer's deed (i.e., no staffing during "The Quiet Years" in
Aspen, etc). This ruling on procedure was important to the federal
court's analysis of pending cross motions for summary judgment.
In July of 2004, Public Counsel helped
secure favorable rulings from the United States District Court
in all eight "test" cases, dismissing on summary judgment
the plaintiffs' claims of ownership as groundless and awarding attorneys’ fees
against all eight plaintiffs. While the plaintiffs have appealed
to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit in Denver, their
chances of success are slim. A favorable decision on appeal should
have a domino effect on all 45 other cases which are on administrative
hold pending final resolution of the eight "test" cases.
In 2005, we
anticipate that a favorable ruling from the 10th Circuit will
defeat this entire land grab and insure the permanent protection of
these 66 wilderness inholdings.
|
|
|
