Wayment v. Howard
Utah Supreme Court
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
- State v. PenaUtah Supreme Court · 1994
- Jau-Fei Chen v. StewartUtah Supreme Court · 2004
- State v. GreenUtah Supreme Court · 2005
- Adams v. Portage Irrigation Reservoir & Power Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1937
- Salt Lake City v. GardnerUtah Supreme Court · 1911
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- Normandeau v. Hanson Equipment, Inc.Utah Supreme Court · 2009
- ASC Utah, Inc. v. Wolf Mountain Resorts, L.C.Utah Supreme Court · 2013
- Bingham v. Roosevelt City Corp.Utah Supreme Court · 2010
- Utah County v. ButlerUtah Supreme Court · 2008
- Kerr v. City of Salt LakeUtah Supreme Court · 2013
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.