Sand Creek Lateral Irrigation Co. v. Davis
Supreme Court of Colorado
Appeal from County Court of Weld County. This was a condemnation proceeding under the act of eminent domain. Mills’ Ann. Statutes, chap. 45. The petitioner Davis claimed, and sought to procure, from the defendant, the Sand Creek Lateral Irrigation Company, a right of way through its ditch for the conveyance of water to irrigate his lands. He based such claim upon an act of the general assembly, approved Feb. 12,1881, Session Laws, p. 164; Mills’ Stats., sec. 2261, et seq.
Read the full summary
Appeal from County Court of Weld County. This was a condemnation proceeding under the act of eminent domain. Mills’ Ann. Statutes, chap. 45. The petitioner Davis claimed, and sought to procure, from the defendant, the Sand Creek Lateral Irrigation Company, a right of way through its ditch for the conveyance of water to irrigate his lands. He based such claim upon an act of the general assembly, approved Feb. 12,1881, Session Laws, p. 164; Mills’ Stats., sec. 2261, et seq. The act is as follows: “ Sec. 1. That no tract or parcel of improved or occupied land in this state, shall, without the…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Elliott
The petitioner Davis sets forth in his petition, among other things, that he is the owner of certain agricultural lands, and that for a'number of years past he has run the water for the irrigation of said lands from the source of supply through and over a long and difficult route, over dykes and indirect courses, causing great and unnecessary labor and expense, besides causing failure of his regular and proper supply of water and of his use and enjoyment of the same.
He further avers that a feasible and practicable route for the conveyance of water to a portion of his said lands lies in land…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Colorado Cent. R. v. AllenSupreme Court of Colorado · 1889
- Tripp v. OverockerSupreme Court of Colorado · 1883
- Leonard v. RoganWisconsin Supreme Court · 1866
- Burnham v. FreemanSupreme Court of Colorado · 1888
- Downing v. MoreSupreme Court of Colorado · 1888
3Cited by18 opinions
- Nichols v. McIntoshSupreme Court of Colorado · 1893
- Portneuf Irrigating Co. v. BudgeIdaho Supreme Court · 1909
- Union Pacific Railroad v. Colorado Postal Telegraph-Cable Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1902
- Colorado Fuel & Iron Co. v. Four Mile Railway Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1901
- Mulford v. Farmers Reservoir & Irrigation Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1916
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.