Legal Opinion

Ukon Water Co. v. Rooker

Utah Supreme Court

Decided June 9, 1920No. 3450PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Appeal from District Court, First District, Box Elder County; J. D. Call, Judge. Action by the Ukon "Water Company against Henry W. Rooker and others. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendants appeal.

1Opinion of the CourtGideon, J.

In this action plaintiff seeks to condemn for culinary and domestic purposes the waters from a certain spring belonging to defendants. The complaint was filed June 3, 1919. Defendants made separate answers. On the 15th day of October, 1919, a stipulation was entered into between counsel for the respective parties to the effect that the taking of the water in question by the plaintiff was a public necessity, *296and that tbe waters sought to be condemned are subject to condemnation.

Plaintiff (respondent) has filed a motion to strike the bill of exceptions from the record, on the ground that it…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Dayton v. FreeUtah Supreme Court · 1914
  2. Swanson v. SimsUtah Supreme Court · 1917
  3. Thomas v. BlytheUtah Supreme Court · 1913
  4. Fisher v. Bonneville Hotel Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1920
  5. Hutchinson v. SmartUtah Supreme Court · 1917

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Maybee v. MaybeeUtah Supreme Court · 1932
  2. Jeremy Fuel & Grain Co. v. Denver & R. G. R.Utah Supreme Court · 1921
  3. Perry Irrigation Co. v. ThomasUtah Supreme Court · 1929

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

Powered by the Exa API