Utah Code
Utah Code § 73-3-18 (2026)
Lapse of application -- Notice -- Reinstatement -- Priorities -- Assignment of application -- Filing and recording -- Constructive notice -- Effect of failure to record
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
UT-LEGle.utah.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
If an application lapses for failure of the applicant to comply with a provision of this title or an order of the state engineer, the state engineer shall promptly give notice of the lapse to the applicant by regular mail, or send notice electronically if receipt is verifiable.
The state engineer may, upon a showing of reasonable cause, reinstate a lapsed application if, no later than 60 days after the state engineer mails or sends electronically the notice of lapse described in Subsection (1), the applicant files:
a request to reinstate the application using a reinstatement form provided by the state engineer; and
a request for an extension of time under Section 73-3-12.
Except as provided in Subsection (2)(c), the state engineer shall change the date of priority of a reinstated application to the date the request for reinstatement was filed.
The original priority date of a lapsed application may not be reinstated, except upon a showing of mistake of the state engineer or fraud.
Except as provided in Section 73-3-5.6, Section 73-3-12, Section 73-3-20, or Subsection (2), the priority of an application is determined by the day on which the state engineer's office receives the written application.
Before the state engineer issues a certificate of appropriation, a right claimed under an application for the appropriation of water may be assigned by a written instrument, including by use of a form provided by the state engineer's office.
An instrument assigning a right described in Subsection (4) shall be recorded in the office of the applicable county recorder to provide notice of the instrument's contents.
Beginning July 1, 2017, the state engineer shall consider an assignment using the state engineer's form described in Subsection (4) that is recorded and forwarded to the state engineer as a submitted report of water right conveyance for purposes of fulfilling Subsection 73-1-10(3)(a).
An instrument described in Subsection (4) that is not recorded as described in Subsection (5) is void against any subsequent assignee in good faith and for valuable consideration of the same application or any portion of the same application, if the subsequent assignee's own assignment is recorded as described in Subsection (5) first.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1990–2025 · leading case: Badger v. Brooklyn Canal Co., 966 P.2d 844 (Utah 1998).
Badger v. Brooklyn Canal Co., 966 P.2d 844 (Utah 1998). “Plaintiffs base their constructive notice argument on Utah Code Ann. § 73-3-18 , which provides that once holders of water rights register with the State Engineer such registry “shall from time of filing of same in said office impart notice to all persons of the contents thereof.”
Loosle v. First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n of Logan, 858 P.2d 999 (Utah 1993). “Section 73-3-18 provides in part: Prior to issuance of certificate of appropriation, rights claimed under applica *1003 tions for appropriation of water may be transferred or assigned in instruments in writing.”
Little v. Greene & Weed Inv., 839 P.2d 791 (Utah 1992). “Also, an inchoate right under an unperfect-ed application can be transferred in a separate transaction pursuant to § 73-3-18, which provides in part: “Prior to issuance of certificate of appropriation, rights claimed under applications for the appropriation of water may be…”
Little v. Greene & Weed Investments, 796 P.2d 718 (Utah Ct. App. 1990). “§ 73-1-10 (1989), which states that final water rights may be transferred by deed in substantially the same manner as real estate, and upon Utah Code Ann. § 73-3-18 (1989), which states that rights claimed under water right applications may be transferred by instruments in…”
Marriott v. Wilhelmsen, 2025 UT 35 (Utah 2025). “Marriott points out that Utah Code section 73-3-18 allows applicants to assign unapproved applications to appropriate, 45 and he notes that caselaw “has already recognized that inchoate rights created by a water rights application can be transferred.”
— Utah Code § 73-3-18(4) — 1 case
Marriott v. Wilhelmsen, 2025 UT 35 (Utah 2025). “Marriott points out that Utah Code section 73-3-18 allows applicants to assign unapproved applications to appropriate, 45 and he notes that caselaw “has already recognized that inchoate rights created by a water rights application can be transferred.”
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.