Legal Opinion

Gunnison-Fayette Canal Company v. Roberts

Utah Supreme Court

Decided July 26, 1961No. 9081PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

McDonough, justice.

Plaintiff commenced the action below to recover from the defendants their pro rata •share of the expenses for the operation and •maintenance of a canal which the parties •used jointly. The case was tried to the •court without a jury and from an adverse .judgment the defendants appeal.

The plaintiff corporation operates and ^maintains the Gunnison-Fayette Canal ■which diverts water from the Sevier River at a point approximately one and one-half miles northwest of the community of Axtel, Utah, and conveys the water so diverted in a general northerly direction to the east of…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Cole v. ParkerUtah Supreme Court · 1956
  2. Minersville Reservoir & Irrigation Co. v. Rocky Ford Irr. Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1936
  3. West Union Canal Co. v. ThornleyUtah Supreme Court · 1924
  4. Peterson v. Sevier Valley Canal Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1944
  5. Utah Power & Light Co. v. Richmond Irrigation Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1949

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Green River Canal Co. v. ThaynUtah Supreme Court · 2003
  2. Swasey v. Rocky Point Ditch Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1980
  3. WARREN IRRIGATION COMPANY v. BrownUtah Supreme Court · 1972
  4. Rageth v. Sidon Irrigation DistrictWyoming Supreme Court · 2011
  5. Swasey v. Rocky Point Ditch Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1983

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API