Badger v. Brooklyn Canal Co.
Utah Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
STEWART, Associate Chief Justice:
This case is before us on appeal from the district court’s review of a decision issued by the State Engineer. The State Engineer approved Brooklyn Canal Company’s (“Brooklyn”) application for a change in its diversion point on the Sevier River. Incident to an application for de novo review, the district court granted Brooklyn’s motion for summary judgment against various plaintiffs who asserted claims either as shareholders in Brooklyn or as possessors of private well water rights and who collectively claimed that the change in diversion would be harmful to…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Winegar v. Froerer Corp.Utah Supreme Court · 1991
- Harline v. BarkerUtah Supreme Court · 1996
- Plateau Mining Co. v. Utah Division of State Lands & ForestryUtah Supreme Court · 1990
- K & T, INC. v. KoroulisUtah Supreme Court · 1994
- People v. Keith Railway Equipment Co.California Court of Appeal · 1945
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Badger v. Brooklyn Canal CompanyUtah Supreme Court · 1998
- Washington County Water Conservancy District v. MorganUtah Supreme Court · 2003
- Dixon v. Pro Image Inc.Utah Supreme Court · 1999
- Longley v. Leucadia Financial Corp.Utah Supreme Court · 2000
- State v. Huntington-Cleveland Irrigation Co.Utah Supreme Court · 2002
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.