• View enhanced case on Westlaw
  • KeyCite this case on Westlaw
  • http://laws.findlaw.com/us/243/622.html
    Cases citing this case: Supreme Court
    Cases citing this case: Circuit Courts
    WYOMING v. COLORADO , 243 U.S. 622 (1917)

    U.S. Supreme Court

    WYOMING v. COLORADO , 243 U.S. 622 (1917)

    243 U.S. 622

    STATE OF WYOMING, Complainant,
    STATE OF COLORADO, Greeley-Poudre Irrigation District, and Laramie-Poudre Reservoirs & Irrigation Company.

    No. 7, Original.

    Supreme Court of the United States
    Argued December 6, 7, and 8, 1916

    March 6, 1917

    Messrs. John W. Lacey and N. E. Corthell for complainant.

    Mr. Fred Farrar for the state of Colorado.

    Mr. Delph E. Carpenter for the Greeley-Poudre Irrigation District.

    Mr. Julius C. Gunther for the Laramie-Poudre Reservoirs & Irrigation Company.

    It is ordered that this case be restored to the docket for reargument.

    1. Counsel are requested to specially direct their attention to the rule which they deem should properly be applied to a solution of the controversy for decision: That is, whether the rights asserted are to be tested and determined solely by the application of the general principles of prior appropriation, without regard to state boundaries, or whether, on the contrary, the general principles of prior appropriation are subject to be restricted or their operation limited in this case by state lines, and if so, by what principles, under that assumption, the case is to be controlled.

    2. They are moreover requested not merely by generalizations to state the facts relied upon, but specifically, by careful reference to the pages of the record, and to group them under the various propositions relied upon, including the extent of the use of water in both states when the work complained of was begun and when this suit was commenced, and the extent of appropriation made or authorized in either or both states since its commencement.

    3. In view of the legislation of Congress concerning [622-Continued.]

    reclamation and the extensive public works which have been constructed under that legislation and the possible consequences which may result from the rule to be applied in the solution of this controversy, the clerk is instructed to notify the Attorney General of the United States of this order for reargument.

    FindLaw Career Center

      Search for Law Jobs:

        Post a Job  |  View More Jobs
    Ads by FindLaw