Laserfiche WebLink
<br />w..-;,. ;,' \. <br /> <br />, <br /> <br />,jl' <br />Iii (" <br /> <br />,-II!' ,\, I <br />I: <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />" <br />'I <br /> <br />and gra~ted on new' evidence, 'a protestan1t (there <br /> <br />have persuaded the water judge that he <br />his finding of ,due diligence and ~n estab~ <br />" ' 1 d". I 1 <br />~n tle con ~t~ona <br />However, the eJidence <br />I <br />conditional decree and the finding of <br />I ' <br />thelsubse- <br /> <br />, <br />the !judge <br />, 'I I <br />was :noner might <br />erred in making <br />I <br />, <br />lis~ing the priority dates granted <br />: I I <br />decree entered two years earlier. <br />, 'I I <br />supportjd both the <br />I I, ' <br />due diligence. <br />: I <br />quent Olders of the court. <br /> <br />, : The judgment is reversed, and the cause is re- <br /> <br />manded '0 the water judge for reinstatement of the cancelled <br />I I I , <br />decrees. reinstatement of the priority dates, and to re- <br />I <br />enter t e previous finding of due diligence. <br />I <br /> <br />The evidence does not support <br /> <br /> I, . <br /> I <br /> ,I , <br /> I, <br /> , <br /> I <br /> i <br /> I I <br /> I. I <br /> , <br /> I I' , <br /> I; I <br /> I, :1447 <br /> I' <br /> t: <br /> I I <br /> I <br /> ! <br /> I , <br /> . <br /> ,', <br /> I I <br /> I <br /> I I I <br /> I , <br /> I -' <br /> I , <br /> I <br /> 981 <br /> -6- I <br /> I I <br /> , II I <br />"II, iU I I~J: ,Iii, <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />'I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />d <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />I <br />