Parsons v. Fort Morgan Reservoir & Irrigation Co.
Supreme Court of Colorado
Error to Morgan District Court. — Hon. H. P. Burke, Judge.
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Gabbert
The burden was upon the plaintiffs to establish abandonment, and in order to sustain a finding that a water right has been abandoned the testimony bearing on the subject should be clear and convincing. Abandonment consists of the two elements, act and intention, and non-*151use alone of the water represented by decreed priorities, at least short of the period of the statute of limitations, is not sufficient to establish abandonment, hut non-use continued for a considerable length of time, coupled with other acts of a character tending to show an intention on the part of the owner not to resume or…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Sieber v. FrinkSupreme Court of Colorado · 1883
- New Mercer Ditch Co. v. ArmstrongSupreme Court of Colorado · 1895
- Platte Valley Irrigation Co. v. Central Trust Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1904
- White v. NuckollsSupreme Court of Colorado · 1910
- O'Brien v. KingSupreme Court of Colorado · 1907
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Knapp v. Colorado River Water Conservation DistrictSupreme Court of Colorado · 1955
- Beaver Park Water, Inc. v. City of VictorSupreme Court of Colorado · 1982
- Bijou Irrigation District v. Weldon Valley Ditch Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1919
- Arnold v. RoupSupreme Court of Colorado · 1916
- North Boulder Farmers' Ditch Co. v. Leggett Ditch & Reservoir Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1917
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.