HEAL Utah vs. Kane County Water Conservancy District
In this case, the Utah Court of Appeals was asked to review whether a trial court erred in approving two applications that requested to change the points of diversion and use of water for a planned nuclear power plant. The Court held that in order to determine if there was unappropriated water available they would not look at a sum of all approved appropriated water, but instead would look at the total amount of water currently being used for a beneficial purpose. The Court affirmed the district court’s decision, holding that unappropriated water existed, the new appropriations would not have an unreasonable effect on environment, and that the project was not overly speculative.
Jenco v. Perkins Coie
In this case, the Utah Court of Appeals was asked to review whether the trial court correctly interpreted a contract. The Court held that despite one amendment seemingly causing one party to waive a right, when the amendment was read in congruence with the following amendment the provision was clear. Additionally, the Court noted that no evidence had been presented to counter the interpretation. The Court affirmed the trial court’s finding and remanded the case back to the trial court in order to alter the awarded damages.