My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Notice of Appeal
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
4001-5000
>
Notice of Appeal
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/15/2010 1:11:38 PM
Creation date
7/7/2010 4:42:58 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
Description
Case No. 02SA226, Breckenridge
State
CO
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Water Division
5
Date
7/16/2002
Author
Ken Salazar, Susan Schneider
Title
Notice of Appeal
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Court Documents
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
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
rock formations. Phase II consisted of seven (7) rock formations located immediately <br />upstream of Phase I. The total length of the Whitewater Park is approximately 1800 feet. <br />The Water Court granted to the Town of Breckenridge conditional water rights for both <br />phase one and phase two of the project which includes all 15 rock formations. <br />The State contends the Water Court improperly granted an instream flow water right to an <br />entity other than the Colorado Water Conservation Board. The State argues that the Water <br />Court erred in extending the holding of Thornton v. Ft. Collins 830 P.2d 915 (Colo. 1992) to <br />allow water to run freely in the channel. In State also contends that the Breckenridge <br />Whitewater course neither controlled the water nor put it to beneficial use within the <br />meaning of section 37 -92- 103(4), 10 C.R.S. (2000). Finally, the State argues that the Water <br />Court granted excessive amounts of water and times for use. <br />B. The judgment appealed and statement of the basis for appellate jurisdiction. <br />The entire water court judgment and decree is being appealed. The Supreme Court has <br />jurisdiction pursuant to C.A.R. 1 (a)(2), 4 (a), and § 13- 4- 102(1)(d), 5 C.R.S. (2001). <br />C. Whether the judgment or order resolved all issues including attorneys' <br />and costs. <br />A Motion regarding attorneys fees has been filed. A Motion for Clarifying language in <br />decree has also been filed. The judgment and decree of the water court is final as to all other <br />issues. <br />D. Whether the judgment was made final in accordance with C.R.C.P. 54(b). <br />Yes. <br />E. Date the Judgment and Decree was entered and the date of mailing to counsel. <br />The judgment and decree was entered and mailed to counsel on June 5, 2002. <br />F. Whether there were any extensions granted to file any motions for post -trial <br />relief. <br />An extension of time was granted in which to file motions for attorneys' fees. That <br />extension has expired and the motion has been filed. <br />G. The date any motion for post -trial relief was filed. <br />PA <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.