Laserfiche WebLink
m <br /> 0 <br /> 0 <br /> 20 <br /> 0 <br /> district oourts in Colorado, and particularly as it might <br /> affect the out-of-state rights of Kansas water users. m <br /> That is the thought that was going through my mind. <br /> 0 <br /> I do not know if there is too much merit in it, or any <br /> merit. <br /> n <br /> MR. VIDAL: We are not extending the jurisdiction of <br /> the Colorado court. The Colorado court has jurisdiction. <br /> No transfer can be made without an adjudication by the <br /> Colorado court. My suggestion is simply that we provide <br /> in ease any application for transfer from Water District <br /> 67 is made the court having jurisdiotion to hear that <br /> application shall site that notice is given to the Compact <br /> Administration. It is simply a matter of procedure. <br /> Originally the matter of notice was a very restricted <br /> subjeot, so that we gave notice up and down the river. <br /> SECRETARY NOE: Assuming that that is true of con- <br /> ditions in Colorado, do you think that that principle of <br /> law being in effect in Kansas, and Kansas being one of <br /> the compacting states here, that that could legally obtain <br /> in no far as Kansas interests give any Colorado district <br /> court the right to adjudicate matters affecting property <br /> rights in Kansas. <br /> KR. VIDAL: Here is the concrete practical applica- <br /> tion. Generally speaking we are allocating on a basis <br />