Court Opinion

ID: 9625660
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 07:46:56.484919+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:57:06.579069
License: Public Domain

MAUGHAN, Justice,
dissenting:
For the following reasons, I dissent:
In my view, a conveyance of “a stock watering right” is, in terms, an express reservation of whatever other rights there may be; and is thus in compliance with the statute.
It appears to me that the trial court took into consideration the total acreage to which the water was appurtenant, including the 11.4 acres of land retained by plaintiff. It further appears that on this base, a proper allocation of the available water was made. The extension of the water line to that part of plaintiffs’ property where he later built his house is also an important consideration, particularly in view of what I believe to be a limitation in the deed. It appears that this was also considered by the trial court. I would affirm.