Wyoming Hereford Ranch v. Hammond Packing Co.
Wyoming Supreme Court
33 Wyo. 14, 236 P.2d 764 (1925)
- Written by Curtis Parvin, JD
Facts
Wyoming Hereford Ranch (the ranch) (plaintiff) and Hammond Packing Company (Hammond) (defendant) were irrigation water appropriators from Crow Creek near Cheyenne, Wyoming. The ranch’s appropriative water rights dated back to an 1888 territorial decree. In 1890, Wyoming became a state and, during its first legislative session, enacted a comprehensive water law that created a permit system under which the state could supervise water diversion and use. Hammond obtained permits for its water use in 1909 and 1911. A dispute arose between Hammond and the ranch, with the ranch claiming priority rights for the irrigation use included in the 1888 decree and the use of Bolln Ditch to irrigate additional acreage. The ranch had been diverting water through the ditch dating back to before Wyoming’s statehood. Hammond conceded that the 1888 decree gave the ranch first-in-time priority to divert water from the creek but contended that the Bolln Ditch diversion, not expressed in the decree, was invalid because the ranch never sought a permit as required by the 1890 law. The ranch conceded that it had not sought a permit for the Bolln Ditch water use but contended that the ranch’s prior appropriative water use created a valid appropriative water right. The ranch further claimed that the law was unconstitutional because the legislation failed to recognize the ranch’s preexisting appropriative water right in the Bolln Ditch. After proceedings before the state engineer, the matter moved to the district court, which ruled in favor of the ranch. Hammond appealed to the Wyoming Supreme Court.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Kimball, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.