Stowell v. Johnson
Utah Supreme Court
• Appeal from a decree of the district court of the first district. The appeal was from the judgment roll, consisting of the complaint, answer, findings and decree.
Read the full summary
• Appeal from a decree of the district court of the first district. The appeal was from the judgment roll, consisting of the complaint, answer, findings and decree. The complaint was filed July 17, 1888, and alleged the ownership in the plaintiffs of certain real estate, and a diversion of the waters of Waterfall canyon creek, and one-half the waters of Strong’s canyon creek, made more than ten years before the beginning of the suit, for the purpose of irrigating the said lands and of supplying Ogden City with water, and a continuous use of said waters after said diversion and appropriation…
1Opinion of the Court
BlaCKbueN, J.:
The appeal in this case is taken for the purpose of modifying the decree made in the first district court, and the claim to have the decree modified is based upon the findings of facts made by the court (the evidence not being in the record) and the common law doctrine of riparian rights. The parts of the decree complained of *223are as follows: “That the plaintiffs are the owners of the right to use all the waters of said Waterfall canyon creek ánd one-half of the waters of said Strong’s canyon creek ■during the winter season, to-wit, between the 15th day -of November and the 15th,…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Sturr v. BeckSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
- Yunker v. NicholsSupreme Court of Colorado · 1872
3Cited by22 opinions
- Re Determination of Water Rights of Hood River.Oregon Supreme Court · 1923
- Big Cottonwood Tanner Ditch Co. v. MoyleUtah Supreme Court · 1946
- Benton v. JohncoxWashington Supreme Court · 1897
- Willey v. DeckerWyoming Supreme Court · 1903
- Horne v. Utah Oil Refining Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1921
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.