Concerning the Application for Water Rights of S. Cade Huffaker and Bradley H. Huffaker in the Conejos River or Its…

Summary

The court held that the postponement doctrine applies because the water in the borrow ditch on both sides of the driveway came from the same source, notwithstanding the driveway's partial diversion of the flow. Because the Huffakers filed their application before Crowther, their rights are senior, and their absolute-right collection area begins at the previously decreed diversion point farther south. The court reversed the water court's judgment, vacated the decrees, and remanded for revised decrees.