Fort Lyon Canal Co. v. Arkansas Valley Sugar Beet & Irrigated Land Co.
Supreme Court of Colorado
Error to the District Court of Prowers County. Eon. Jesse G. Northcutt, Judge. Action by The Ft. Lyon Canal Company, William 0 ’Neill and D. S. Elliott against The Arkansas Valley Sugar Beet and Irrigated Land Company and E. B. Chew, as superintendent of irrigation for water district No. 2 of the state of Colorado. From a judgment for defendants, plaintiffs bring error.
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Gabbert
Can the relative rights of canals drawing water from the same stream for the purposes of irrigation, where their respective priorities have been regularly determined and awarded by adjudication proceedings in different water districts, be determined as between each other in an independent action after the lapse of four years from the date the respective adjudication decrees fixing such priorities were rendered? is the question presented for our determination in this case.
Plaintiff in error, The Fort Lyon Canal Company, owner of the Fort Lyon Canal, in connection with William O’Neill and D. S.…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Barker v. HarveySupreme Court of the United States · 1901
- Farmers Independent Ditch Co. v. Agricultural Ditch Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1896
- Louden Irrigating Canal Co. v. Handy Ditch Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1896
- Montrose Canal Co. v. Loutsenhizer Ditch Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1896
- Lower Latham Ditch Co. v. Louden Irrigating Canal Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1900
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- Campbell v. Wyoming Development Co.Wyoming Supreme Court · 1940
- Town of De Beque v. EnewoldSupreme Court of Colorado · 1980
- Laramie Irrigation & Power Co. v. GrantWyoming Supreme Court · 1932
- Lower Latham Ditch Co. v. Bijou Irrigation Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1907
- El Paso & R. I. Ry. Co. v. District Court of Fifth Judicial DistrictNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1931
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.