Legal Opinion

North Poudre Irrigation Co. v. Hinderlider

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided June 19, 1944No. 15,169PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Knous

Claiming that by a valid decretal order of the district court of Larimer county, made in a general adjudication in 1909, it was entitled to an over-all delivery for storage in its No. 3 Reservoir, of 125,000,000 cubic feet of water, plaintiff in error, hereinafter to be referred to as plaintiff, instituted the suit, the judgment in which is here for review, against the public water officials, herein joined as defendants in error, to restrain them from computing and limiting water deliveries to said reservoir upon the basis of the depth of water above the outlet tube therein, as it was said…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Securities & Exchange Commission v. United States Realty & Improvement Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1940
  2. People v. HinderliderSupreme Court of Colorado · 1936
  3. People ex rel. Park Reservoir Co. v. HinderliderSupreme Court of Colorado · 1936
  4. Bromfield v. Trinidad Nat. Inv. Co.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1929
  5. Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers v. Chicago, M., St. P. & P. R.District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 1940

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Lobato v. StateSupreme Court of Colorado · 2009
  2. Leonhart v. District CourtSupreme Court of Colorado · 1958
  3. Briggs v. American Family Mutual Insurance Co.Colorado Court of Appeals · 1992
  4. Ahern v. BakerSupreme Court of Colorado · 1961
  5. Hall v. City & County of DenverSupreme Court of Colorado · 1948

14 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