Laserfiche WebLink
� <br />z <br />� <br />A. ALLKN sROWN IIY04-19891 <br />M{CMAEL R. SCMOTTELKptTE <br />JAM2S D. OtiOWN <br />ROOERT 6. TWLLDCLI <br />LAW OFFICE$ OP <br />B80WN �i,ND BROWN <br />SSO PALMER <br />P. O. !OX 43 <br />D73LTA, COLOBADQ 91419-0043 <br />September 12, 1988 <br />Colorado Water Conservation Board <br />Department of Natural Resaurces <br />721 State Centennial Building <br />1313 Sherman Street <br />Denver, CO 80203 <br />l�CE111aD � 1 <br />� <br />sEP� � .� •�e <br />COLORA�i:,; waT�Ft <br />CCNSE�tVAT10N <br />��� <br />ARCw Cooc 3Q3 <br />TRLEPMONL 874-4451 <br />VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS <br />Re: Overlan8 Ditch and Reservoir Coa+pany <br />Supplementai Opinion to 4pinion Dated September 10, 1988 <br />Gentlemens <br />This letter will confirm my telephone conversatioa with Keith Eberhaxt <br />earlier today and is intended to clarify onr opinion of September 10, 1988 as <br />it relates to the pledge of the Overland Reservoir and inlet and outlet <br />ditches and appur�enant structures as coilaternl for the loan. While it <br />remains our opinion that the Hoard of Direators of the Company h as the paw <br />�O p1ea..e ..,'a., .,�2 �..._ -- -„ _,. - <br />�do Appellate Caurt deciaions have <br />mntual ditch company are the c�+►ners of <br />the water righte and facilities. See, <br />and �or 3efferson Connty, 189 Colo. 380, <br />of the shareholders' specific interests <br />recoqnf�ed that sharehol8ers of a <br />epecific real property interests in <br />e.g. Jacobucci v. Distziat Caurt in <br />542 P.2d 667 {�,975) . �ny comreyanca <br />Qf <br />their stock i.n.coniunction with <br />� Nathinq in our opinion of 8eptember 10, 1988 shculd be <br />construe to cate that the conveyance of the Reservoir to you would be <br />effective as to the recognized real property interests of the individual <br />shareholders. <br />We would aiso point out that although the present contract calls far a <br />conveyance of the Reservoir by "deed af trust", the Overland has furnished a <br />Special Warranty Deed in conformity with C.R.S. 37-60-120. It is our opinion <br />that such conveyance is effective as a mort.qaqe or pledge of the <br />corporation's interest fn the property. See Marshall v. Russell, bi Cola. <br />417, 158 P. 141 (1916). <br />Shoul.d you have any questions concerninq our opinion of September 10, <br />2988, as supplemented by this opinion, please feel fres to contact us. <br />Very truly yours, <br />BROWN BROWN <br />sy: r.lrl , <br />s D. Brown <br />JDB/dly <br />cc: Bverland DiCch and Reservoir Campany <br />