Moyer v. Preston
Wyoming Supreme Court
Error to the District Court for the county of Crook, Hon. William S. Metz, Judge. The case is stated in the opinion. Plaintiff in error, Moyer, is entitled to the water, claimed by him, as a riparian owner.
Read the full summary
Error to the District Court for the county of Crook, Hon. William S. Metz, Judge. The case is stated in the opinion. Plaintiff in error, Moyer, is entitled to the water, claimed by him, as a riparian owner. (Act of Congress July, 1866; R. S. Wyo., Sec. 1317; Jones v. Adams, 19 Nev., 78; Line v. Haggin (Cal.), 4 Pac., 925; Union M. & M. Co. v. Ferris 2 Saw., 195; Hanson v. Me Cue, 42 Cal., 303; Elliott v. R. R. Co., 10 Cush., 191.) As Moyer became the owner in fee simple of the lands in question, on August 9, 1885, and at that time became entitled to claim the water as a riparian owner, under…
1Opinion of the Court
Potter, Justice.
Whether this action was one brought under the then existing statutory provisions or an adjudication of the priorities of rights to use water for beneficial purposes, or was purely a personal action brought by defendant in error to restrain plaintiff in error from unlawfully diverting the waters of a natural stream to the detriment of defendant in error, and for damages for a past diversion of such water, and incidentally a determination of the priorities between such parties, need not be determined. The amended petition is entitled as to parties the same as any ordinary civil…
2Cited by24 opinions
- Nebraska v. WyomingSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Wyoming v. ColoradoSupreme Court of the United States · 1922
- Farm Investment Co. v. CarpenterWyoming Supreme Court · 1900
- Benton v. JohncoxWashington Supreme Court · 1897
- Willey v. DeckerWyoming Supreme Court · 1903
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.