Legal Opinion

Wayment v. Howard

Utah Supreme Court

Decided September 29, 2006No. 20050547, 010903790PublishedCited by 22 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WILKINS, Associate Chief Justice:

¶ 1 Appellant Lee R. Howard seeks review of the trial court’s decision finding for Appel-lees Glynn F. Wayment and Edward C. England on their claim of interference with water right number 35-8073 and against Howard’s counterclaims of trespass, negligence, and nuisance. We affirm on all issues.

BACKGROUND

¶ 2 Appellee Wayment owns real property bordered on the south by Appellee England. England’s property is bordered on the south by Appellant Howard’s property. A slough, traditionally known as the “Marriot Slough,” traverses the Appellees’ and the Appellant’s…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. State v. PenaUtah Supreme Court · 1994
  2. Jau-Fei Chen v. StewartUtah Supreme Court · 2004
  3. State v. GreenUtah Supreme Court · 2005
  4. Adams v. Portage Irrigation Reservoir & Power Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1937
  5. Salt Lake City v. GardnerUtah Supreme Court · 1911

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. Normandeau v. Hanson Equipment, Inc.Utah Supreme Court · 2009
  2. ASC Utah, Inc. v. Wolf Mountain Resorts, L.C.Utah Supreme Court · 2013
  3. Bingham v. Roosevelt City Corp.Utah Supreme Court · 2010
  4. Utah County v. ButlerUtah Supreme Court · 2008
  5. Kerr v. City of Salt LakeUtah Supreme Court · 2013

17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API