Current Creek Irrigation Co. v. Andrews

Gerald Fowkes (defendant) owned land that featured multiple artesian wells and one spring used to irrigate the land. Orville Andrews (defendant) also owned land with flowing wells and a spring for irrigation. Andrews also added a pump well to irrigate his land. Current Creek Irrigation Company (Current Creek) (plaintiff) sought to augment its primary water source (Mona Reservoir) with groundwater from the same aquifer used by Fowkes and Andrews. Current Creek contracted with Andrews to place pump wells on Andrews’s property to divert water to Mona Reservoir. When Andrews’s or Current Creek’s pump wells were in use, the pump wells reduced the hydrostatic pressure in the naturally artesian basin, resulting in a diminution in the flow to the natural-flowing wells and springs. Fowkes, Andrews, and Current Creek each sued the others to establish their rights to access the groundwater. The trial court consolidated the three cases. First, the court determined the priority of water rights as Fowkes first, Andrews second, and then Current Creek. Next, the court found that the groundwater basin had unappropriated water even after considering the three parties’ water rights. Finally, the court held that the pumping wells interfered with the preexisting flowing wells and springs and enjoined the pumping by Andrews and Current Creek unless they replaced the water lost from the flowing wells and springs. All three parties appealed to the Utah Supreme Court.