In an appeal from the district court’s denial of a prospective intervenor’s motion to intervene in a water rights dispute, the order is vacated with instructions to dismiss the motion where a proposed intervenor could not establish standing, and thus federal court jurisdiction over its motion to intervene, by “piggybacking” on the standing of an existing party to a lawsuit over which the district court had retained jurisdiction but within which there was no current, active dispute among the parties.
Read Colorado Springs v. N. Colo. Water Conservancy Dist., No. 08-1154
Appellate Information
Filed November 25, 2009
Judges
Opinion by Judge Ebel
Counsel
For Appellant:
Brian Nazarenus and Olivia D. Lucas, Ryley Carlock & Applewhite, Denver, CO
For Appellees:
Bennett Raley, Mary M. Hammond and William A. Paddock, Carlson, Hammond& Paddock, LLC, Denver, CO
You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help
Civil Rights
Block on Trump’s Asylum Ban Upheld by Supreme Court
Criminal
Judges Can Release Secret Grand Jury Records
Politicians Can’t Block Voters on Facebook, Court Rules
