My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
LPPD000400
CWCB
>
Loan Projects
>
Backfile
>
1-1000
>
LPPD000400
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/19/2009 11:01:21 AM
Creation date
3/26/2007 10:37:07 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Loan Projects
Contract/PO #
C150067
Contractor Name
Lower South Platte Water Conservancy District
Contract Type
Loan
Water District
64
County
Logan
Loan Projects - Doc Type
Feasibility Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
115
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />and the News Tribune, legal newspapers of general circu- <br />lation in Morgan County. The publication was made in each <br /> <br /> <br />of the newspapers in the manner required by law. The Clerk <br /> <br /> <br />of the Court on Novenlber 5, 1963, caused a copy of the <br /> <br /> <br />Notice to be mailed by United States registered mail to <br /> <br /> <br />each of the Boards of County Commissioners of Sedgwick, <br /> <br /> <br />Logan, Washington and Morgan Counties. <br /> <br />5. On December 6, 1963 a protest petition was filed <br /> <br />through Hafflce, Johns and Kleinsmith, and George A. Epperson <br />and Donald F. McClary, attorneys for protestants. <br />6. On December 23, 1963 objections were filed by <br />Jesse K. Snodgrass, T. E. Duncan, W. J. Peyton and Ralph <br />Solt through their attorneys Haffke, Johns and Kleinsmith, <br />and George A. Epperson and Donald F. McClary, denying the <br />allegations in the petition and the objections are hereby <br />overruled. <br />7. On January 6, 1964 this Court ordered: (1) that <br />the time for filing certificates regarding the protest <br />petition by the Treasurers of Morgan and Sedgwick Counties <br />was extended, (2) that counsel for petitioners and protestants <br />stipulated both the Petition and protest petition had <br />sufficient signatures of owners of non-irrigated land, <br />(3) that counsel for petitioners and protestants stipulated <br />the aggregate value of the irrigated land owned by persons <br />who signed the protest petition was sufficient, (4) that <br />counsel for petitioners and protestants exchange and file <br />objections to signatures on either petition before February 6, <br />1964, (5) that the motion filed by protestants to supplement <br />the protestants' petition as to three named persons by <br />adding descriptions was granted, (6) that the hearing was <br /> <br />-4- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.