Salt Lake City v. United Park City Mines Company
Utah Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
ELLETT, Justice:
This is an appeal by the City from an adverse ruling by the lower court sitting without a jury. The defendant, hereafter called the Mine, constructed an adit referred "to as the Spiro Tunnel into the mountain and obtained a large flow of water. The City claims that the flow of water down Big Cottonwood Creek was diminished by the diversion through the adit. The 'City owns most of the flow of this creek.
At the commencement of trial the .court determined that the following-issues were to be tried:
1. Has there been an unnatural loss in the flow of Big Cottonwood Creek ?
2. If so,…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Provo River Water Users' Ass'n v. CarlsonUtah Supreme Court · 1943
- Davidson v. HockingWisconsin Supreme Court · 1958
3Cited by6 opinions
- Lamonts Apparel, Inc. v. SI-Lloyd AssociatesCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1998
- White v. RandallCourt of Appeals of Utah · 2007
- Time Commercial Financing Corp. v. BrimhallUtah Supreme Court · 1978
- Salt Lake City v. United Park City Mines CompanyUtah Supreme Court · 1972
- White v. RandallCourt of Appeals of Utah · 2007
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.