Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-87-01606/USCOURTS-ca10-87-01606-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Algonquin, Ltd.
Appellant
Boomerang Road Company
Not Party
Canyon Land and Development Corporation
Not Party
Canyon Partners, Ltd.
Not Party
Examiner Building, Ltd.
Appellant
Walter C. McClennan
Appellant
New Sheridan Bar & Hotel, Ltd.
Appellant
River Enterprises, Inc.
Not Party
Roma Bar, Ltd.
Appellant
David R. Sklare
Appellant
The Telluride Company
Appellee
West Telluride, Ltd.
Not Party

Document Text:

FILED 

Unffid~Caartot~ ~~ 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT 

J~N W57ffi 

~OBE:WI'1L. HfflQISD 

ALGONQUIN, LTD.; ROMA BAR, LTD.; 

NEW SHERIDAN BAR & HOTEL, LTD.; 

EXAMINER BUILDING, LTD.; 

WALTER C. MCCLENNAN; and 

DAVID R. SKLARE, 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Plaintiffs-Appellants, ) 

v. 

THE TELLURIDE COMPANY, a 

Colorado corporation, 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Defendant-Third-Party ) 

Plaintiff-Appellee, ) 

v. 

CANYON LAND AND DEVELOPMENT 

CORPORATION; RIVER ENTERPRISES, 

INC.; WEST TELLURIDE, LTD.; 

CANYON PARTNERS, LTD.; and 

BOOMERANG ROAD COMPANY, 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Third-Party Defendants.) 

!ffleik -t" 

No. 87-1606 

(D. Colorado) 

(D.C. No. 82-Z-2121) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT 

Before ANDERSON, BARRETT and BRORBY, Circuit Judges. 

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel 

has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially 

assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 

34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.8. The cause is therefore ordered 

submitted without oral argument. The oral argument scheduled for 

Friday, January 20, 1989 is vacated. 

Appellate Case: 87-1606 Document: 01019962013 Date Filed: 01/05/1989 Page: 1 
Plaintiffs/Appellants appeal from an order of the district 

court denying plaintiffs' motion to reopen their action in which a 

judgment had been entered more than three and one-half years 

previously. The district court also denied the plaintiffs' motion 

for an order requiring the defendant/appellee, The Telluride 

Company, to show cause why it should not be held in contempt of 

court for violating certain terms of the settlement agreement 

which led to the judgment in the case. 

The district court reviewed the record and additional 

information received from the parties, and made various findings 

and conclusions. Those findings are not clearly erroneous, the 

legal principles are correctly stated, and the court did not abuse 

its discretion. Based on the reasons articulated therein, the 

order of the district court is affirmed in all respects. 

Telluride has filed a motion requesting that this court 

abstain from further proceedings because Telluride has filed a 

declaratory judgment action in state court dealing with the same 

underlying subject matter. That motion is denied both on the 

merits and because it is rendered moot by this Order and Judgment. 

The appellants' "Motion for Leave to File Response to Appellee's 

Reply on the Abstention Issue" is granted. 

Because of the very limited nature of the issues in this 

appeal, this court has determined that the actions taken herein do 

not interfere with the stay resulting from that certain bankruptcy 

filing in the United States Bankruptcy Court of Ohio, Northern 

District, Eastern Division, Case No. B88-0100, inclusive of 

-2-

Appellate Case: 87-1606 Document: 01019962013 Date Filed: 01/05/1989 Page: 2 
adversary proceeding B88-0186 or B88-0188, and Case No. B88-4291, 

or other related proceedings before that court. The court notes 

in addition that no issue on the point has been raised in this 

court by any party and, in fact, the plaintiffs/appellants 

represent that they elected to proceed in this forum insofar as 

possible (Appellants' Response to Appellee's Reply on the 

Abstention Issue, p.2, ,, 3-4). 

AFFIRMED. 

ENTERED FOR THE COURT 

Stephen H. Anderson 

Circuit Judge 

-3-

Appellate Case: 87-1606 Document: 01019962013 Date Filed: 01/05/1989 Page: 3