Swasey v. Rocky Point Ditch Co.
Utah Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
MAUGHAN, Justice:
Plaintiffs initiated this action to secure injunctive relief and damages against de*377fendant, a mutual ditch company.1 Defendant counterclaimed, seeking a declaration of its obligation to plaintiffs under the company’s articles of incorporation and the laws of this state. The matter was tried before the court and all issues were determined adversely to plaintiffs’ claims. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed with the exception of the determination concerning the assessment for “new” water, which is remanded for further hearing in accordance with this opinion. All…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Miller v. Imperial Water Co. No. 8California Supreme Court · 1909
- Genola Town v. Santaquin CityUtah Supreme Court · 1938
- Baird v. Upper Canal Irrigation Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1927
- Burtenshaw v. Bountiful Irr. Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1936
- Gunnison-Fayette Canal Company v. RobertsUtah Supreme Court · 1961
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Salt Lake City Corp. v. Cahoon & Maxfield Irrigation Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1994
- Rageth v. Sidon Irrigation DistrictWyoming Supreme Court · 2011
- Swasey v. Rocky Point Ditch Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1983
- East Jordan Irrigation Co. v. MorganUtah Supreme Court · 1993
- East Jordan Irrigation Co. v. MorganUtah Supreme Court · 1993
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.