1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. P.2d
  4. 788 P.2d
  5. 788 P.2d 772 (1990)
 

DENVER v. SNAKE RIVER WATER DIST.

No. 88SA365.

788 P.2d 772 (1990)

The CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER, acting By and Through its BOARD OF WATER COMMISSIONERS, Applicant-Appellant, v. SNAKE RIVER WATER DISTRICT; the Colorado River Water Conservation District; Middle Park Water Conservancy District; Breckenridge Ski Area; Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District; Dillon Valley District; Keystone-Arapahoe, Ltd.; Copper Mountain, Inc.; Town of Dillon; Town of Silverthorne; the Metropolitan Denver Water Authority; and the Division Engineer, Water Division No. 5, Objectors-Appellees.

Supreme Court of Colorado, En Banc.

Rehearing Denied April 9, 1990.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Wayne D. Williams, Michael L. Walker and Casey S. Funk, Denver, for applicant-appellant.

Holme, Roberts & Owen, Glenn E. Porzak, Boulder, for objector-appellee Snake River Water Dist.

Donald H. Hamburg, Gen. Counsel, Colorado River Water Conservation Dist. Glenwood Springs, for objector-appellee Colorado River Water Conservation Dist.

Baker, Cazier and McGowan, Stanley W. Cazier, Granby, for objector-appellee Middle Park Water Conservancy Dist.

Delaney & Balcomb, P.C., Kenneth Balcomb, Glenwood Springs, for objectors-appellees Breckenridge Ski Area and Copper Mountain, Inc.

Sherman & Howard, Gary L. Greer, Denver, for objector-appellee Keystone-Arapahoe, Ltd.

Grant, Bernard, Lyons & Gaddis, Jeffrey J. Kahn, Longmont, for objector-appellee Town of Dillon.

Hill & Robbins, David Robbins, Denver, for objector-appellee Town of Silverthorne.

No appearance for Northern Colorado Water Conservancy Dist., Dillon Valley Dist., The Metropolitan Denver Water Authority and The Div. Engineer, Water Div. No. 5.

Justice LOHR delivered the Opinion of the Court.

The City and County of Denver, acting by and through its Board of Water Commissioners ("Board"), appeals the judgment of the District Court, Water Division No. 5 ("water court"), denying the Board's application for certain changes of water rights. The water court found that the water rights, historically used to generate electric power at a site later inundated by the waters of Dillon Reservoir, had been abandoned and...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases