Faden v. Hubbell
Supreme Court of Colorado
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Adams
William L. Hubbell, Yiola Gr. Hubbell, F. L. Riser and F. O. Riser, hereinafter called plaintiffs, brought suit ag’ainst Charles Faden, Lester Warwick, Cecile Orrock Warwick and Andrew J. Heil, hereinafter called defendants. The purpose of the suit was to have the latter enjoined from changing’ their place or manner of diversion of certain underground waters from a higher to a lower water level in water district No. 2, in a way that plaintiffs claim interfered or would interfere with the gravity flow of water to- the fish ponds of the latter. Injunctive relief, both restraining and mandatory,…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Louden Irrigating Canal Co. v. Handy Ditch Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1896
- Fort Morgan Land & Canal Co. v. South Platte Ditch Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1892
- Nevius v. SmithSupreme Court of Colorado · 1928
- Medano Ditch Co. v. AdamsSupreme Court of Colorado · 1902
- Buckers Irrigation, Milling & Improvement Co. v. Farmers' Independent Ditch Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1903
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by23 opinions
- Farmers Highline Canal & Reservoir Co. v. City of GoldenSupreme Court of Colorado · 1954
- Dehaas v. BeneschSupreme Court of Colorado · 1947
- Whitten v. CoitSupreme Court of Colorado · 1963
- In Re the Adjudication of the Existing Rights to the Use of All the WaterMontana Supreme Court · 2002
- Colorado Water Conservation Board v. City of CentralSupreme Court of Colorado · 2005
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.