Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Annual Report For 1970 <br /> <br />Attorney' 5 Report <br /> <br />To <br /> <br />The Amity Mutual Irrigation Company <br /> <br />TO THE STOCI, HOLDERSOF THE AMITY MUTUAL IRRIGATION COMPA1\Y I <br /> <br />During the past year of operation your Attorney has handled and I <br />passed on various legal matters of a more or less routine nature which I <br />arise from time to time from an operation of the type handled by your <br />Company. -I <br /> <br /> <br />At the present time the Campan,y is involved in ,P.:1ore litigation than <br />perhaps ever at anyone time in its histor~:. We will ~t out below herein <br />the various cases along with some comments as to their present status: <br /> <br />CASE NO, 1 BROYLES VS, AMITY <br /> <br />This is the case we have commented on before in our annual reports <br />and arose out of damages suffered by Bro,yles during the 1965 flood. In this <br />case tIle Company is represented by Pueblo Attorneys retained by the <br />insurance carrier we had at that time, along with your own attorney. Since <br />our last report there have been various hearings and activities preliminary <br />to going to trial on the merits, however at this time no trial date has been <br />set. <br /> <br />CASE 1\0, 2 SHINI'\ VS. AMITY <br /> <br />This is a suit brought against the Company on or about July 13, <br />1970, b,y Carl M. Shinn. In it he alleges that our canal broke due to our <br />negligence on or about Jul:r 12, 1970 and damaged him in the amount of <br />$16,600.00, and he further asks for punitive danages in the amount of <br />$10,000.00. In addition to this suit, he has also asserted the same claim <br />as a counterclaim in Case #3 below (See comments there). <br /> <br />C.-\SE 1\0, 3 AMITY vs.HAI'\AGAI'\ <br /> <br />This is the case we instituted to determine whether or not we have <br />to carr~y all of the waters from the Wiley Drain which reach our canal. <br />Due to numerous complications and frustrations we have been unable to <br />get this matter to trial as of this date. We can discuss this personaU,}' at <br />the meeting. It does appear now however that C:lse No.2, above, and this <br />case will be tried together. <br /> <br />Page 6 <br />