Crippen v. White

Citation28 Colo. 298, 64 P. 184
Case DateMarch 04, 1901
CourtSupreme Court of Colorado

64 P. 184

28 Colo. 298

CRIPPEN
v.
WHITE et al.

Supreme Court of Colorado

March 4, 1901


Appeal from district court, Chaffee county.

Proceedings by J. J. Crippen against Otis White and others. From a judgment dismissing the complaint, plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.

This is an action, as designated by counsel for appellant, who instituted this proceeding in the court below, to partition the waters of the South Arkansas river for irrigation purposes between appellant, as plaintiff, and the appellees, as defendants. In addition to those named, 'the general public of the state of Colorado et al., as possible claimants, who are at present unknown to plaintiff,' were made defendants. The petition filed by plaintiff states, in substance: That he is the owner in trust of certain lands situate upon the margin of this stream, which were settled upon by his remote grantor in 1872. That for the purpose of irrigating such lands a ditch was constructed, and the waters of the stream applied thereon since 1873. For a similar purpose a second ditch was taken out, and water from the stream applied on such lands since 1874. That plaintiff has succeeded to the rights so initiated, and by reason of the application of the water from this stream to the lands in question, and the situation of such lands with respect to the stream, he has become the owner, in common with the people or general public of the state of Colorado, of an undivided property right in and to the volume of water in the stream equal to the carrying capacity of the two ditches. He then proceeds to state that other named defendants have like rights to the waters of such stream, by reason of the situation of their lands, and the diversion of water, some of which are inferior and others paramount to his; that certain other defendants claim an interest in the waters of the stream; that the lands upon which they apply the same are not situate thereon, but upon the margin of another; that the people of the state, by virtue of section 5, article 16, of the constitution (quoting from the petition), 'are owners in common with plaintiff et al. of such an undivided part and portion of the waters of said natural stream as may remain unappropriated, after setting apart to plaintiff et al. such quantity of the waters of said stream as may be sufficient to irrigate their said lands along the margin thereof, as located under the provisions of said territorial statutes, and no more'; that certain other defendants, naming them (again quoting from the petition), 'are each dependent for title upon the title to such remainder of the waters of said stream as may have been acquired by the general public as before stated, and from which source...

To continue reading

Request your trial
11 practice notes
  • People ex rel. Salazar v. Davidson, No. 03SA133
    • United States
    • December 1, 2003
    ...Court, 198 Colo. 419, 425, 601 P.2d 1072, 1075 (1979); Vogts v. Guerrette, 142 Colo. 527, 533, 351 P.2d 851, 855 (1960); Crippen v. White, 28 Colo. 298, 302, 64 P. 184, 185 6. Other states have considered the Attorney General's ethical obligations in inter-executive disputes, and their deci......
  • Vogts v. Guerrette, No. 18834
    • United States
    • Colorado Supreme Court of Colorado
    • May 2, 1960
    ...than our own statutes to find apt illustration of material change in the common law as it existed in the year 1607. In Crippen v. White, 28 Colo. 298, 64 P. 184, 185, plaintiff was the owner of riparian lands prior to the adoption of the Colorado constitution and sought a decree thereafter ......
  • People v. Davidson, Case No. 03SA133 (Colo. 12/1/2003), Case No. 03SA133.
    • United States
    • Colorado Supreme Court of Colorado
    • December 1, 2003
    ...Court, 198 Colo. 419, 425, 601 P.2d 1072, 1075 (1979); Vogts v. Guerrette, 142 Colo. 527, 533, 351 P.2d 851, 855 (1960); Crippen v. White, 28 Colo. 298, 302, 64 P. 184, 185 6. Other states have considered the Attorney General's ethical obligations in inter-executive disputes, and their deci......
  • State of Wyoming v. State of Colorado, No. 3
    • United States
    • United States Supreme Court
    • June 5, 1922
    ...Co., 18 Colo. 142, 31 Pac. 854; Wyatt v. Larimer & Weld Irrigation Co., 18 Colo. 298, 33 Pac. 144, 36 Am. St. Rep. 280; Crippen v. White, 28 Colo. 298, 64 Pac. 184; Moyer v. Preston, 6 Wyo. 308, 44 Pac. 845, 71 Am. St. Rep. 914; Farm Investment Co. v. Carpenter, 9 Wyo. 110, 61 Pac. 258, 50 ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
11 cases
  • People ex rel. Salazar v. Davidson, No. 03SA133
    • United States
    • December 1, 2003
    ...Court, 198 Colo. 419, 425, 601 P.2d 1072, 1075 (1979); Vogts v. Guerrette, 142 Colo. 527, 533, 351 P.2d 851, 855 (1960); Crippen v. White, 28 Colo. 298, 302, 64 P. 184, 185 6. Other states have considered the Attorney General's ethical obligations in inter-executive disputes, and their deci......
  • Vogts v. Guerrette, No. 18834
    • United States
    • Colorado Supreme Court of Colorado
    • May 2, 1960
    ...than our own statutes to find apt illustration of material change in the common law as it existed in the year 1607. In Crippen v. White, 28 Colo. 298, 64 P. 184, 185, plaintiff was the owner of riparian lands prior to the adoption of the Colorado constitution and sought a decree thereafter ......
  • People v. Davidson, Case No. 03SA133 (Colo. 12/1/2003), Case No. 03SA133.
    • United States
    • Colorado Supreme Court of Colorado
    • December 1, 2003
    ...Court, 198 Colo. 419, 425, 601 P.2d 1072, 1075 (1979); Vogts v. Guerrette, 142 Colo. 527, 533, 351 P.2d 851, 855 (1960); Crippen v. White, 28 Colo. 298, 302, 64 P. 184, 185 6. Other states have considered the Attorney General's ethical obligations in inter-executive disputes, and their deci......
  • State of Wyoming v. State of Colorado, No. 3
    • United States
    • United States Supreme Court
    • June 5, 1922
    ...Co., 18 Colo. 142, 31 Pac. 854; Wyatt v. Larimer & Weld Irrigation Co., 18 Colo. 298, 33 Pac. 144, 36 Am. St. Rep. 280; Crippen v. White, 28 Colo. 298, 64 Pac. 184; Moyer v. Preston, 6 Wyo. 308, 44 Pac. 845, 71 Am. St. Rep. 914; Farm Investment Co. v. Carpenter, 9 Wyo. 110, 61 Pac. 258, 50 ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT