Legal Opinion

Hankins v. Borland

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided October 2, 1967No. 21554PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

William L. Gobin. *

We refer to the plaintiff and defendant in error either by name or as defendant and plaintiff as they appeared in the trial court.

Maude E. Borland sued twenty-four defendants in the trial court to enjoin them from increasing the volume of water allowed to flow from their respective farm lands onto her lands. She claimed the volume was in excess of that which previously flowed thereon by virtue of an agreement between her and certain predecessors in title of some of the defendants. Mrs. Borland asked that the defendants be restrained from discharging any water…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Yunker v. NicholsSupreme Court of Colorado · 1872
  2. Rogers v. Lower Clear Creek Ditch Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1917
  3. Seven Lakes Reservoir Co. v. MajorsSupreme Court of Colorado · 1921
  4. City of Boulder v. Boulder & White Rock Ditch & Reservoir Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1923
  5. Ambrosio v. Perl-Mack Construction Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1960

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

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Diamond v. New Jersey Bell Telephone Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1968
  2. HOUSING AUTHORITY OF TOWN OF LIMON v. Leo A. Daly Co.Colorado Court of Appeals · 1975
  3. Docheff v. City of BroomfieldColorado Court of Appeals · 1980
  4. Greene v. Green Acres Construction Co.Colorado Court of Appeals · 1975
  5. Shockley v. Public Service Company of ColoradoColorado Court of Appeals · 1974

12 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