Laserfiche WebLink
1 <br />District Court rejected the efforts <br />of two <br />downstream <br />2 <br />Purgatoire ditches.to get involved, <br />really, <br />in the transfer <br />3 case which the Supreme Court said actually did become final in <br />4 1965. That case then proceeded to the Supreme Court strictly <br />5 on a question of law whether Highland and Nine Mile were <br />6 entitled to be parties to the model 'transfer case. <br />7 The Supreme Court said, "Too late," essentially; <br />8 they said the decree became final in 1965. <br />9 So then the right, such right as may be there, <br />10 was transferred to the Trinidad Reservoir. <br />11 The litigation involving the Trinidad - Reservoir <br />12 began a year and about three months ago, roughly. That case <br />13 1 involved an action brought by the Purgatoire Conservancy <br />14 District and all of the member ditches in that district against <br />15 the Highland Irrigation Company and against the Nine Mile Canal <br />16 Company. The Amity Mutual Company intervened as a defendant, <br />17 the Fort Lyon Canal Company intervened as a defendant. The <br />18 case was tried to the court much as any other civil action was <br />19 tried or is tried. The decision of Judge Statler' in that case <br />20 was essentially that the state water officials should be <br />21 enjoined from doing what they were at that time doing and, <br />22 furthermore,. that a portion of the model storage right had <br />23 been abandoned prior to the transfer to the Trinidad Reservoir. <br />24 In short, Judge Statler has ruled and decreed <br />25 that 13,800 acre -feet of storage right was abandoned prior to <br />