Supreme Court Of The Territory...1888Check Treatment
By the Court :
The judgment is affirmed. The court holds that the homesteader was the prior appropriator of the water right, and the plaintiff had no right to enter upon the prior possession of the entryman, under his homestead entry, and appropriate any portion of the running streams or creeks thereon.
All of the justices concur except Francis and Garland, JJ., who dissent.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.
