Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 Colorado opinions name it 1 courts 1979–2015 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Colorado courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Coffin v. Left Hand Ditch Co.green2 sentences1983Many of the mines and farms were remote from natural streams, and "the settlers in this new land quickly realized that the riparian doctrine of water rights that had served well in the humid *1305 regions of the East would not work in the arid lands of the West." [8] California v. United States, 438 U.S. 645, 653 , 98 S.Ct. 2985, 2990 , 57 L.Ed.2d 1018 (1978); see generally California Oregon Power Co. v. Beaver Portland Cement Co., 295 U.S. 142 , 55 S.Ct. 725 , 79 L.Ed. 1356 (1935) (cited herein as California Oregon Power Co. ); United States v. City and County of Denver, 656 P.2d 1 (Colo.1982 1983Many of the mines and farms were remote from natural streams, and “the settlers in this new land quickly realized that the riparian doctrine of water rights that had served well in the humid regions of the East would not work in the arid lands of the West.” 8 California v. United States, 438 U.S. 645, 653 , 98 S.Ct. 2985, 2990 , 57 L.Ed.2d 1018 (1978); see generally California Oregon Power Co. v. Beaver Portland Cement Co., 295 U.S. 142 , 55 S.Ct. 725 , 79 L.Ed. 1356 (1935) (cited herein as California Oregon Power Co.); United States v. City and County of Denver, 656 P.2d 1 (Colo.1982); Coffin | 1 | 2 |
Board of County Commissioners of Arapahoe v. United Statesgreen2 sentences2015Comm’rs v. United States, 891 P.2d 952, 962 (Colo. 1995). ¶16        Colorado is a prior appropriation state that has abolished the riparian doctrine. 2015Comm'rs v. United States, 891 P.2d 952, 962 (Colo.1995). 116 Colorado is a prior appropriation state that has abolished the riparian doctrine. | 1 | 1 |
California Oregon Power Co. v. Beaver Portland Cement Co.green2 sentences1983Many of the mines and farms were remote from natural streams, and "the settlers in this new land quickly realized that the riparian doctrine of water rights that had served well in the humid *1305 regions of the East would not work in the arid lands of the West." [8] California v. United States, 438 U.S. 645, 653 , 98 S.Ct. 2985, 2990 , 57 L.Ed.2d 1018 (1978); see generally California Oregon Power Co. v. Beaver Portland Cement Co., 295 U.S. 142 , 55 S.Ct. 725 , 79 L.Ed. 1356 (1935) (cited herein as California Oregon Power Co. ); United States v. City and County of Denver, 656 P.2d 1 (Colo.1982 1983Many of the mines and farms were remote from natural streams, and "the settlers in this new land quickly realized that the riparian doctrine of water rights that had served well in the humid *1305 regions of the East would not work in the arid lands of the West." [8] California v. United States, 438 U.S. 645, 653 , 98 S.Ct. 2985, 2990 , 57 L.Ed.2d 1018 (1978); see generally California Oregon Power Co. v. Beaver Portland Cement Co., 295 U.S. 142 , 55 S.Ct. 725 , 79 L.Ed. 1356 (1935) (cited herein as California Oregon Power Co. ); United States v. City and County of Denver, 656 P.2d 1 (Colo.1982 | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Colorado. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
California v. United States
green
2 sentences1983Many of the mines and farms were remote from natural streams, and "the settlers in this new land quickly realized that the riparian doctrine of water rights that had served well in the humid *1305 regions of the East would not work in the arid lands of the West." [8] California v. United States, 438 U.S. 645, 653 , 98 S.Ct. 2985, 2990 , 57 L.Ed.2d 1018 (1978); see generally California Oregon Power Co. v. Beaver Portland Cement Co., 295 U.S. 142 , 55 S.Ct. 725 , 79 L.Ed. 1356 (1935) (cited herein as California Oregon Power Co. ); United States v. City and County of Denver, 656 P.2d 1 (Colo.1982 1983Many of the mines and farms were remote from natural streams, and "the settlers in this new land quickly realized that the riparian doctrine of water rights that had served well in the humid *1305 regions of the East would not work in the arid lands of the West." [8] California v. United States, 438 U.S. 645, 653 , 98 S.Ct. 2985, 2990 , 57 L.Ed.2d 1018 (1978); see generally California Oregon Power Co. v. Beaver Portland Cement Co., 295 U.S. 142 , 55 S.Ct. 725 , 79 L.Ed. 1356 (1935) (cited herein as California Oregon Power Co. ); United States v. City and County of Denver, 656 P.2d 1 (Colo.1982 | 2 | 1982–1983 |
Thomas v. Guiraud
green
2 sentences1979In 1883, early in the history of this state, this court in Thomas v. Guiraud, 6 Colo. 530 , rejected the argument that Guiraud’s appropriation was invalid because he had constructed no ditches. 1979In 1883, early in the history of this state, this court in Thomas v. Guiraud, 6 Colo. 530 , rejected the argument that Guiraud’s appropriation was invalid because he had constructed no ditches. | 2 | 1979–1979 |
United States v. City & County of Denver Ex Rel. Board of Water Commissioners
green
2 sentences1983Many of the mines and farms were remote from natural streams, and "the settlers in this new land quickly realized that the riparian doctrine of water rights that had served well in the humid *1305 regions of the East would not work in the arid lands of the West." [8] California v. United States, 438 U.S. 645, 653 , 98 S.Ct. 2985, 2990 , 57 L.Ed.2d 1018 (1978); see generally California Oregon Power Co. v. Beaver Portland Cement Co., 295 U.S. 142 , 55 S.Ct. 725 , 79 L.Ed. 1356 (1935) (cited herein as California Oregon Power Co. ); United States v. City and County of Denver, 656 P.2d 1 (Colo.1982 1983Many of the mines and farms were remote from natural streams, and “the settlers in this new land quickly realized that the riparian doctrine of water rights that had served well in the humid regions of the East would not work in the arid lands of the West.” 8 California v. United States, 438 U.S. 645, 653 , 98 S.Ct. 2985, 2990 , 57 L.Ed.2d 1018 (1978); see generally California Oregon Power Co. v. Beaver Portland Cement Co., 295 U.S. 142 , 55 S.Ct. 725 , 79 L.Ed. 1356 (1935) (cited herein as California Oregon Power Co.); United States v. City and County of Denver, 656 P.2d 1 (Colo.1982); Coffin | 1 | 1983–1983 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.