Legal Opinion

EAST BENCH IRRIGATION COMPANY v. State

Utah Supreme Court

Decided August 11, 1956No. 8487PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WADE, Justice.

What provisions should be included in the district court’s judgment is the question raised by this appeal. The State Engineer rejected the applications of the respondents, who are the plaintiffs in this action, to change the place of diversion and the place and manner of use of the waters of the South Fork of the Sevier River. The district court on appeal reversed that decision and we affirmed its holding that the applications should be approved but reversed some other provisions of that judgment.1 Each side of this controversy is greatly concerned in obtaining the full benefit…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. United States v. District Court of Fourth Judicial Dist. Ex Rel. Utah CountyUtah Supreme Court · 1951
  2. Tanner v. Bacon, State EngineerUtah Supreme Court · 1943
  3. United States v. District Court of Fourth Judicial District Ex Rel. Utah CountyUtah Supreme Court · 1952
  4. East Bench Irr. Co. v. Deseret Irr. Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1954
  5. Provo Bench Canal and Irrigation Co. v. LinkeUtah Supreme Court · 1956

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Green River Canal Co. v. ThaynUtah Supreme Court · 2003
  2. Western Water, LLC v. OldsUtah Supreme Court · 2008
  3. Butler, Crockett & Walsh Development Corp. v. Pinecrest Pipeline Operating Co.Utah Supreme Court · 2004
  4. S & G, INC. v. MorganUtah Supreme Court · 1990
  5. United States Fuel Co. v. Huntington-Cleveland Irrigation Co.Utah Supreme Court · 2003

11 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