Broad Run Investment Co. v. Deuel & Snyder Improvement Co.
Supreme Court of Colorado
Appeal from Weld District Court — Hon. Christian A. Bennett, Judge.
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Campbell
The Broad Run Investment Company, a corporation, claimed an appropriation of water for irrigation in water district No. 1, of ninety cubic feet, with a priority as of December 27, 1900, the date of the be-, ginning of work on its Trowel ditch, which was thereafter diligently completed and the water from it applied to a beneficial-use. It also claimed that the ditch was constructed, in part, to carry and utilize an additional appropriation, acquired by its grantor, of fifteen second cubic feet under what is commonly known as the Meadow Act (sec. 2268, Mills’ Ann. *575Stats.; sec. 3176, Bev. Stats.…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- New Mercer Ditch Co. v. ArmstrongSupreme Court of Colorado · 1895
- Nichols v. McIntoshSupreme Court of Colorado · 1893
- Louden Irrigating Canal Co. v. Handy Ditch Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1896
- Montrose Canal Co. v. Loutsenhizer Ditch Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1896
- Fort Lyon Canal Co. v. Arkansas Valley Sugar Beet & Irrigated Land Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1907
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Dallas Creek Water Co. v. HueySupreme Court of Colorado · 1997
- Farmers' High Line & Reservoir Co. v. WolfColorado Court of Appeals · 1913
- Mays v. District Court ex rel. Butte CountyIdaho Supreme Court · 1921
- In re German Ditch & Reservoir Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1913
- Trowell Land & Irrigation Co. v. Bijou Irrigation DistrictSupreme Court of Colorado · 1918
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.