Arkoosh v. Big Wood Canal Co.
Idaho Supreme Court
1Opinion
On Rehearing.
BAKER, District Judge.
— -Respondents Hans Sorenson and Merl C. Sorenson asked for a rehearing, contending that the original opinion herein denied them their appropriation of water for domestic use during the nonirrigation season granted by the Frost decree.
We believe that a proper interpretation of the Frost decree is that while it awarded to respondents and their predecessors a right to use, during the irrigation season, a particular quantity of water for irrigation and allied purposes, it was too indefinite and uncertain to award to them another or separate and distinct right…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Reno v. RichardsIdaho Supreme Court · 1918
- Walsh v. WallaceNevada Supreme Court · 1902
- Nephi Irrigation Co. v. VickersUtah Supreme Court · 1897
- Powers v. PerryCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1909
- Lee v. HanfordIdaho Supreme Court · 1912
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.