|
~..., ... _,..., ~... ..-u uiou p.3
<br />[tle use Of C°I'tat~TL Wa't£.T an rile il~iaXWeii Dit~ ~VIiYiCI~ UA1 Ci1C p11L~AtllliG ~1VCr L1~C ~?tSL4(C$
<br />,, agseed.%o exchange the use of vrater ~gbts on tine NL3xwe11 I:3ttc~i as set fozti~t ~.n. th:er '_
<br />ea~tof'c7%ite,119$$ T)efend8ilt draftefl the Ag<e~ent TIuGAnrul. ixe~o~ceblc
<br />. acwidu~g to i#s terms, as previously found in the Order dated February 23,1992; ~a~.gtsi~li)aa .,~ ; ;.. .
<br />January 3U, 1995;, enber~ed in connection with Mr. Tatum's mutiou fur partial ~' - ~-
<br />- suwmazY.l~ - - ._.
<br />.... .
<br />meat. Basin Resources, Tnc. is the successor iri interest to Wyoming Fuel Conipairy in:tlie.: -
<br />A.~~:. ~.-- .
<br />g~ement. c .. _ ... _ .__ .....
<br />;~„ _ ..
<br />_:-;, ...
<br />= `w Bltl is the owner of 3.0 c.~s. ofthe 4.0 c.t:s. originatly ~ to the Ivlzuv~C11 Nv. 11
<br />Ditch water right. Tatum is the owner of 3.0 c.fs. in the Maxwell No. 9 Ditch water right.
<br />Wyoming Fuel and Tatum 8$reed to an exchangelirade of the use of 2 v.fs. of d1ei~ respective
<br />_. interests in the water rights as set forth la the letter of 7uue 1, 1988. Both parties performed ._ .
<br />under the Agreement by honoring the exchange for several sw7ainers. At t3ie tiiuc of tlris
<br />Agreem~ot, the parties were. unceztain whether the exchange required water courtapproval . .
<br />_.. ,
<br />_ . _aztdagtreed to cooperate if water court approval was required. Bfforts to eompld:c tTin trans-_
<br />action btvke dawn offer personnel changed at Wyoming Fuel Compauy,..and totli patties.
<br />,~~,,..
<br />.:,.~_~.
<br />ut..~..ascly Ccas~d, euorts to complete the transaction.; ,This lawsuit ft731uwtxl . The; 7une,,1,19Se ` : -
<br />~,~.~.~.
<br />Agreement between the parties provided that they would exchange a like atuouxit ofwatea from
<br />_ diff~_eat IOC,atioas, end aLSO reeoghtzed that the existing prrvrities ofthc water x~ts might;-irr ...: .:
<br />-:;_ ~ ' . iui[ttr:, fwuil ~ 'rY'het they referred W as a "shortfall" and also provided what was to be done
<br />~- _
<br />m that event. 1Tie parties wnteznpL•ited and discussed a simple excltanga .af-:tlxc u5c ofeaoh-_.....: _
<br />_. _-others' water and sought to avoid the need for involvemetrt of the wafer coark. - `the-Agreerncitt -
<br />.Was $ Siftipic "yuu +.UC ruy wiuca aid 1'll use your walnr"- 'C'he ~axtics did not contemplate the
<br />exciianae of priority rititnber or points of diversion. Their A meat ssiy so stated. The.
<br />Ag"re'einent contemplated water cant appru was size exp ~d t„
<br />'that
<br />arc w~,ro9S.. _..,.~.,.`tsS_..:~c1a ,:this juaysdiotion }lave histaciaally allowed parties
<br />-~: .
<br />to cxchaage the use bf'watez without water court alljudicatiau and, is facf,'tlie parties exeh-
<br />angeduse of each others' water until defendant contacted state aid local water at:Lt+orities
<br />ciain)t dg tiidl .~ r'asr~u^ae2Xt 'vSw ~::_ ;:,i;:1;~aY~c rii priority nlAnbCr9 5174. point of diversion;
<br />thereby .-~uu:n~; water cotxt app=oval. After the state and local water officials stopped the
<br />water exchange, defendant sold ltie water they traded to Tatum.,, to a third party ('1'oupal).
<br />The Court finds :from the evidenlx tbat the parties entered into the Agreemerrt tc
<br />exchange the Maxwell Ditch water rights and both parties partially performed under the
<br />Agreenuetxi..i uixy;.iery a:,ii. ~u:r :su:ue:u::s :.,.-..:d.:s in personnel at the mining opera#,ion, and
<br />iar. sale Gi ri yaiui~ i' u%i t:, ;jaci:i Res;.i~ces, Inc., defendant's new personnel and owners
<br />rner_.7_~raa~a r. r,r .-,.. r.v.. .n. -
<br />5T 3~Jtld Wflltll WIP 65T09b86TL
<br />rr1~T.7
<br />5T~5T L00Z/Z0/b0
<br />
|