Erickson v. Bennion
Utah Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
CROCKETT, Justice:
Plaintiffs sought to recover damages caused to their home and property by irrigation water which flowed there after use by the defendant. After the presentation of the plaintiff’s evidence, the defendant made a motion to dismiss. Upon consideration of the evidence, together with the depositions of the parties, the court, as the trier of the facts, made findings (as permitted by Rule 41(b), U.R.C.P.) against the plaintiffs, and entered judgment accordingly. Plaintiffs appeal.
Plaintiffs Erickson’s farm home is located on the north side of the highway (Utah State Highway 26)…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Jensen v. Davis & Weber Counties Canal Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1913
- Lisonbee v. Monroe Irrigation Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1899
- Park v. ALTA DITCH & CANAL COMPANYUtah Supreme Court · 1969
- Christensen v. ChristensenUtah Supreme Court · 1959
- Movie Films, Inc. v. First Security Bank of Utah, NAUtah Supreme Court · 1968
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Allen v. United StatesDistrict Court, D. Utah · 1984
- DCR INC. v. Peak Alarm Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1983
- Loveland v. Orem City Corp.Utah Supreme Court · 1987
- AMS Salt Industries, Inc. v. Magnesium Corp. of AmericaUtah Supreme Court · 1997
- Groen v. Tri-O-Inc.Utah Supreme Court · 1983
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.