Legal Opinion

Big Cottonwood Tanner Ditch Co. v. Moyle

Utah Supreme Court

Decided June 15, 1945No. 6721PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WADE, Justice.

Plaintiff, respondent herein, an irrigation company, as the owner of easements for its ditches and canals which extended across tracts of land owned by defendants, appellants herein, brought this suit to enjoin the defendants from preventing it from entering upon their lands for the purpose of cementing and waterproofing its ditches.

The defendants are the owners of considerable tracts of land valuable chiefly for residential purposes. They admitted that plaintiff was the owner of easements over their respective lands and that these easements consisted of ditches and canals…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Wrathall v. JohnsonUtah Supreme Court · 1935
  2. Little Cottonwood Water Co. v. KimballUtah Supreme Court · 1930
  3. Nielson v. SandbergUtah Supreme Court · 1943
  4. Salt Lake City v. GardnerUtah Supreme Court · 1911
  5. Stephens Ranch & Live Stock Co. v. Union Pac. R.Utah Supreme Court · 1916

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Big Cottonwood Tanner Ditch Co. v. MoyleUtah Supreme Court · 1946
  2. Zollinger v. FrankUtah Supreme Court · 1946
  3. North Union Canal Company v. NewellUtah Supreme Court · 1976
  4. Lunt v. KitchensUtah Supreme Court · 1953
  5. City of Elk City v. CoffeyCourt of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · 1977

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

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

Powered by the Exa API