United States v. District Court of Fourth Judicial District Ex Rel. Utah County
Utah Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
WADE, Justice.
Although the decision in this case sustained defendants’ contention that the court has jurisdiction to hear the appeal *20from the decision of the State Engineer, defendants’ petition for a rehearing. They contend that we too narrowly limited the issues which could be determined in such appeal.
First, they contend that we “presumptively” held that the Engineer could only approve or reject an application for a change of place of diversion for the full amount of water specified in the application and could not approve the application, but reduce the amount. We do not think that such…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Dietzsch v. HuidekoperSupreme Court of the United States · 1881
- Little Cottonwood Water Co. v. KimballUtah Supreme Court · 1930
- Whitmore v. Murray CityUtah Supreme Court · 1944
- Eardley v. TerryUtah Supreme Court · 1938
- Tanner v. Bacon, State EngineerUtah Supreme Court · 1943
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- In Re Green River Drainage AreaDistrict Court, D. Utah · 1956
- EAST BENCH IRRIGATION COMPANY v. StateUtah Supreme Court · 1956
- East Bench Irr. Co. v. Deseret Irr. Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1954
- American Fork Irr. Co. v. LinkeUtah Supreme Court · 1951
- Little Cottonwood Water Co. v. Sandy CityUtah Supreme Court · 1953
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.