Wyoming v. Colorado, 243 U.S. 622 (1917)
Decided:
March 6, 1917
Syllabus
U.S. Supreme Court
Wyoming v. Colorado, 243 U.S. 622 (1917)Wyoming v. Colorado
No. 7, Original
Argued December 6-8, 1916
Order entered March 6, 1917
243 U.S. 622
Opinions
It is ordered that this case be restored to the docket for reargument. 1. Counsel are requested to specially direct their attention to the rule which they deem should properly be applied to a solution of the controversy for decision: that is, whether the rights asserted are to be tested and determined solely by the application of the general principles of prior appropriation without regard to state boundaries, or whether, on the contrary, the general principles of prior appropriation are subject to be restricted or their operation limited in this case by state lines, and if so, by what principles, under that assumption, the case is to be controlled. 2. They are moreover requested not merely by generalizations to state the facts relied upon, but specifically by careful reference to the pages of the record, and to group them under the various propositions relied upon including the extent of the use of water in both states when the work complained of was begun and when this suit was commenced, and the extent of appropriation made or autoorized in either both states since its commencement. 3. In view of the legislation of Congress concerning reclamation and the extensive public works which have been constructed under that legislation and the possible consequences which may result from the rule to be applied in the solution of this controversy, the clerk is instructed to notify the Attorney General of the United States of this order for reargument.
U.S. Supreme Court
Wyoming v. Colorado, 243 U.S. 622 (1917) Wyoming v. Colorado No. 7, Original Argued December 6-8, 1916 Order entered March 6, 1917 243 U.S. 622 I N EQUITYIt is ordered that this case be restored to the docket for reargument. 1. Counsel are requested to specially direct their attention to the rule which they deem should properly be applied to a solution of the controversy for decision: that is, whether the rights asserted are to be tested and determined solely by the application of the general principles of prior appropriation without regard to state boundaries, or whether, on the contrary, the general principles of prior appropriation are subject to be restricted or their operation limited in this case by state lines, and if so, by what principles, under that assumption, the case is to be controlled. 2. They are moreover requested not merely by generalizations to state the facts relied upon, but specifically by careful reference to the pages of the record, and to group them under the various propositions relied upon including the extent of the use of water in both states when the work complained of was begun and when this suit was commenced, and the extent of appropriation made or autoorized in either both states since its commencement. 3. In view of the legislation of Congress concerning reclamation and the extensive public works which have been constructed under that legislation and the possible consequences which may result from the rule to be applied in the solution of this controversy, the clerk is instructed to notify the Attorney General of the United States of this order for reargument.
Search This Case
