Colo. Rev. Stat. » Title 37

Colo. Rev. Stat. § 37-92-101

Short title

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CO-LEGleg.colorado.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

This article shall be known and may be cited as the "Water Right Determination and Administration Act of 1969".

Source: L. 69: p. 1200, § 1. C.R.S. 1963: § 148-21-1.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 117 cases, 1975–2018 · leading case: Colorado River Water Conservation District v. United States
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Colorado River Water Conservation District v. United States (1976) scotus · cites it 2× “§§ 45-102 to 45-106, 45-141 to 45-154, 45-180 to 45-193, 45-231 to 45-245 (1956 and Supp. 1975); Cal. Water Code §§ 174-192 , XXXX-XXXX (1971 and Supp.”
Gardner v. State (1980) colo · cites it 6× “This appeal raises the question whether the Water Right Determination and Administration Act of 1969 (Water Right Act), section 37-92-101 et seq., C.R.S.1973, permits the water judge, in connection Wjth an application for a determination of abandonment filed under section…”
Gallegos Family Properties, LLC v. Colorado Groundwater Commission (2017) colo “To resolve that appeal, we clarified two salient points of distinction between tributary groundwater managed under the Water Rights Determination and Administration Act, sections 37-92-101 to -602, C.R.S. (2016) (“1969 Act”), and designated groundwater managed under the Colorado…”
Natural Energy Resources Co. v. Upper Gunnison River Water Conservancy District (2006) colo “The law is the same under the Colorado Water Right Determination and Administration Act of 1969, § 37-92-101 et seq. In FWS v. State of Colorado, Division of Wildlife, 795 P.”
Aspen Wilderness Workshop, Inc. v. Colorado Water Conservation Board (1995) colo · cites it 2× “” Because we conclude that the Board has a statutory duty pursuant to section 37-92-102(3) of the Water Right Determination and Administration Act of 1969, §§ 37-92-101 to -602,15 C.R.S. (1990 & 1994 Supp.”
United States v. City & County of Denver Ex Rel. Board of Water Commissioners (1982) colo · cites it 3× “, and the Water Right Determination and Administration Act of 1969, sections 37-92-101 et seq., successively refined and recodified adjudication procedures to meet the needs of the water users in Colorado.”
City of Thornton v. Bijou Irrigation Co. (1996) colo · cites it 2× “Accordingly, the water right administration system developed by the General Assembly focuses on alleviating the scarcity by “max-imiz[ing] the beneficial use of all of the waters of this state,” § 37-92-102(l)(a), 15 C.”
Gallegos v. Colorado Ground Water Commission (2006) colo “1969 Act The Water Rights Determination and Administration Act ("1969 Act"), sections 37-92-101 to -602, C.R.S. (2006), "provides the statutory framework for implementing the constitutional right to divert the unappropriated waters of any natural stream to *28 beneficial uses.”
State Engineer v. Castle Meadows, Inc. (1993) colo · cites it 2× “[14] Under the Water Right Determination and Administration Act of 1969, sections 37-92-101 to -602, 15 C.R.S. (1990 & 1992 Supp.”
Colorado Water Conservation Board v. Upper Gunnison River Water Conservancy District (2005) colo “Exercising this authority, SB 216 amended the Water Right Determination and Administration Act of 1969, sections 37-92-101 to -602, C.R.S. (2004), in several important respects.”
Colorado River Water Conservation District v. Vidler Tunnel Water Co. (1979) colo · cites it 2× “Section 37-92-101, et seq., C.R.S. 1973. The court awarded a conditional water storage right, with an appropriation date of August 1, 1973, to the appellee Vidler Tunnel Water Company (Vidler) for storage of 156,238 acre feet of water in its proposed Sheephorn Reservoir.”
Colorado Ground Water Commission v. North Kiowa-Bijou Groundwater Management District (2003) colo · cites it 2× “[37] After we decided Vidler, the legislature amended the definition of appropriation in the Water Right Determination and Administration Act of 1969 to recognize that no appropriation can be based on speculation. See ch.”
Show all 117 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.