# Farmers Highline Canal & Reservoir Co. v. City of Golden

> Supreme Court of Colorado · July 6, 1954 · 129 Colo. 575

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/7828343

## Case

- **Full name:** Farmers Highline Canal and Reservoir Company v. City of Golden
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Colorado
- **Decided:** July 6, 1954
- **Citations:** 129 Colo. 575; 272 P.2d 629; 1954 Colo. LEXIS 452
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** On rehearing by Clark
- **Judges:** Clark
- **Cited by:** 56 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/7828343

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that change in water right from agricultural to municipal use must not increase consumptive use of the water transferred and that satisfying this condition requires balancing agricultural consumptive use before the transfer with the anticipated municipal consumptive us…
- holding junior appropriators have vested rights in the continuation of stream conditions as they existed at the time of their respective appropriations

## Opinion text

On Petition for Rehearing.
Rehearing Denied.
Mr. Justice Clark:
Upon petition for rehearing, it appearing that under our foregoing opinion the City of Golden is the owner of the priorities herein involved and that, under proper conditions, limitations and provisions in the final decree to insure against injury to the rights of junior appropriators, it has the right to a decree for change of point of diversion, and it being called to our attention that no serious dispute exists to the extent of .81 of a second foot of water; it is therefore ordered that pending final *589 determination of said cause upon retrial, said City of Golden shall be permitted to divert at the headgate of the Church Ditch a portion of said priorities, not in excess of .81 of a cubic foot of water per second of time. This order' is to be considered as tentative only and subject to such change as the trial court may determine after the conclusion of such further hearings as are to be held in connection with this matter.
Save for this modification, petition for rehearing is denied.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/7828343. Public record. Not legal advice.