Legal Opinion
Cherokee Metropolitan District v. Simpson
Supreme Court of Colorado
Decided November 27, 2006No. 06SA95PublishedCited by 28 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Hobbs
In this appeal from a judgment of the court for Water Division No. 2,1 the parties contest the meaning of a stipulated decree provision contained in a conditional water rights diligence decree issued by the court on March 8, 1999. The parties to the agreement are Cherokee Metropolitan District (“Cherokee”), the Upper Black Squirrel Creek Ground Water Management District (“the Management District”), the State Engineer, the Division Engineer for Water Division No. 2, and the Colorado Ground Water Commission.
The stipulated decree provision concerns Cherokee’s use of two sets of wells in the…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- USI Properties East, Inc. v. SimpsonSupreme Court of Colorado · 1997
- Santa Fe Trail Ranches Property Owners Ass'n v. SimpsonSupreme Court of Colorado · 1999
- Lane v. UrgitusSupreme Court of Colorado · 2006
- Concerning the Application for Water Rights of the Town of Estes Park v. Northern Colorado Water Conservancy DistrictSupreme Court of Colorado · 1984
- United States v. Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District, and City and County of Denver, a Municipal CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1979
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by28 opinions
- Tonko v. MallowSupreme Court of Colorado · 2007
- Burlington Ditch Reservoir & Land Co. v. Metro Wastewater Reclamation DistrictSupreme Court of Colorado · 2011
- Pinnacol Assurance v. HoffSupreme Court of Colorado · 2016
- Southern Ute Indian Tribe v. King Consolidated Ditch Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 2011
- Cherokee Metropolitan District v. Upper Black Squirrel Creek Designated Ground Water Management DistrictSupreme Court of Colorado · 2011
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.