Case No. 3345 Fourth Amended Complaint and Related July 24 1942

• Description: Case No. 3345 Fourth Amended Complaint and Related July 24 1942
• State: CO
• Date: 7/24/1942
• Author: Boyle, John; Stienmeyer, E.; Rush, William
• Title: Case No. 3345 Fourth Amended Complaint and Related July 24 1942
• Water Supply Pro - Doc Type: Court Documents

t
STATE OF COLORADO )
SS.
COUNTY OF CHAFFEE )
THE SUNNYSIDE PARK DITCH COMPANY
Plaintiff,
Vs.
M. C. HINDERLIDER, as State Engineer
of the State of Colorado; C. W. BEACH,,
as Irrigation Division Engineer for
Irrigation Division No. 2 of the State,
of Colorado, and J. A. BURNETT, as ,
Water Commissioner for Water District
No. 11 of the State of Colorado,
Defendants.
I
IN THE DISTRICT COURT
No. 3345
A N S W E R
Come now the defendants above named and for their answer
to the first cause of action set forth in Plaintiff's Fourth Amended
Complaint, aver:
1. That this Court has no jurisdiction of the subject
matter involved in said first cause of action.
2. That this Court has no jurisdiction of the person of
the real parties in interest whose rights are involved in or affect-
ed by said first cause of action.
3. That the venue, or place of trial, of the matters in
controversy as set forth in said first cause of action herein is
improperly lodged in the District Court of Chaffee County, Colorado
in that the venue, or place of trial, of any controversy as to
priorities of right to the use of water in Water District No. 14
of the State of Colorado is exclusively lodged and fixed by law
in the District Court of Pueblo County, Colorado; and the venue,
or place of trial, of any controversy as to priorities of right to
the use of water in Water Districts Nos. 17 and 67 of the State of
Colorado is exclusively lodged and fixed by law in the District
Court of Bent County, Colorado.
4. That the said first cause of action fails to state any
claim upon which the relief sought therein, or any relief, can be
granted.
5, That it affirmatively appears from the allegations
contained in said first cause of action that the relief sought
therein is barred by the provisions of Ch. 90, Secs. 192 and 193,
C.S.A. 1935 (C,L. 1921, Secs. 1794 and 1795
6. Admit the allegations of Paragraphs 6, 7 and 9 of
said Fourth Amended Complaint.
7. Admit that the head or source of the Arkansas River
is located at or near the crest of the Continental Divide in the
County of Lake and State of Colorado, and that from the source there-
of the said River flows in an easterly direction for a distance of
upward of Three Hundred Fifty miles down to where it crosses the
state line between the States of Colorado and Kansas, and in so
doing the said river passes through Water Districts Nos. 11, 12, 14,
17 and 67 of the State of Colorado.
9. Admit that numerous canals and irrigation companies
and corporations operating at and below the City of Pueblo in said
Water Districts Nos, 14, 17 and 67 projected large irrigation
enterprises and filed upon and laid claim to many large priorities
of right to the use of the waters of said Arkansas River for
-1-