Legal Opinion
Simpson v. Yale Investments, Inc.
Supreme Court of Colorado
Decided December 19, 1994No. 93SA310, 93SA311PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Lohr
In these consolidated cases, 1 the State Engineer and the Division Engineer for Water Division No. 1 (collectively, state engineer) appeal the judgment of the District Court for Water Division No. 1 finding that post-withdrawal depletions will be noninjurious in each case and therefore approving plans for augmentation proposed by the applicants. 2 Pursuant to our order of remand in State Engineer v. Castle Meadows, Inc., 856 P.2d 496 (Colo.1993) (Castle Meadows II), the district court reconsidered whether the applicants’ pumping of their decreed amounts of not nontributary water will cause…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Danielson v. Castle Meadows, Inc.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1990
- Mission Denver Co. v. PiersonSupreme Court of Colorado · 1984
- American Water Development, Inc. v. City of AlamosaSupreme Court of Colorado · 1994
- State Engineer v. Castle Meadows, Inc.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1993
- Weibert v. Rothe Bros., Inc.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1980
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- City of Thornton v. Bijou Irrigation Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1996
- City of Aurora v. Colorado State EngineerSupreme Court of Colorado · 2005
- Farmers Reservoir & Irrigation Co. v. Consolidated Mutual Water Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 2001
- Bennett Bear Creek Farm Water & Sanitation District v. City & County of Denver Ex Rel. Board of Water CommissionersSupreme Court of Colorado · 1996
- Chatfield East Well Co. v. Chatfield East Property Owners Ass'nSupreme Court of Colorado · 1998
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.