Coffin v. Left Hand Ditch Co.
6 Colo. 443 (1882) (1882)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
In an arid region, the common law doctrine of riparian rights is inapplicable; the first party to appropriate water from a natural stream and apply it to a beneficial use has a superior right to that water, regardless of whether the land it is applied to is adjacent to the stream or located in another watershed.
Facts:
- Left Hand Ditch Co. appropriated water from the south fork of the St. Vrain creek.
- The company transported the diverted water through a series of ditches and another creek to the Left Hand creek.
- The water was used to irrigate lands adjacent to the Left Hand creek, which is in a different watershed from the St. Vrain creek.
- Appellants, including George W. Coffin, own lands along the St. Vrain creek downstream from the diversion point.
- In 1879, a drought caused a water shortage in the St. Vrain creek, leaving insufficient water for both the Ditch Co. and the appellants' lands.
- The appellants tore out a portion of the Left Hand Ditch Co.'s dam, physically interfering with its diversion of water.
Procedural Posture:
- Left Hand Ditch Co. filed suit against George W. Coffin and other landowners in a Colorado trial court for damages and injunctive relief.
- The defendants (appellants) answered with several defenses, including claims based on their status as riparian landowners.
- The trial court sustained the plaintiff's demurrers to all defenses except for a general denial, effectively rejecting the defendants' legal theories of riparian rights.
- Following a trial on the remaining claims, a jury found for the plaintiff, Left Hand Ditch Co., and the court entered a judgment awarding damages.
- The defendants, Coffin et al., appealed the judgment to the Colorado Supreme Court.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does the first party to appropriate water from a natural stream for a beneficial purpose have a right to that water superior to the riparian claims of downstream landowners, even when the water is diverted for use in a different watershed?
Opinions:
Majority - Helm, J.
Yes. In the arid West, the doctrine of prior appropriation grants a superior right to water to the first party who diverts it for a beneficial purpose, and this right is not defeated by the common law riparian claims of downstream landowners or by the fact that the water is being used in a different watershed. The court reasoned that the common law doctrine of riparian proprietorship, which grants water rights to those owning land alongside a stream, is fundamentally unsuited to the climate and geography of Colorado, where artificial irrigation is an absolute necessity for agriculture. The doctrine of prior appropriation ('first in time, first in right') better serves public policy by encouraging development and protecting the investments made in diverting water for beneficial use. This right existed prior to any legislation and is considered a 'distinct usufructuary estate, or right of property.' The court further held that the right acquired by prior appropriation is not dependent on the locus of its application, meaning water can be legally diverted from one watershed to irrigate lands in another, as denying this would be inequitable and prevent the cultivation of fertile lands simply because they are not adjacent to a major water source.
Analysis:
This landmark case establishes the 'Colorado Doctrine' of water rights, formally rejecting the English common law of riparian rights in favor of the doctrine of prior appropriation. This decision was foundational for water law throughout the arid American West, creating a legal framework that decoupled water rights from land ownership adjacent to a stream. By validating trans-basin diversions, the court enabled large-scale agricultural and municipal water projects that were essential to the region's economic development. The case solidifies the principle that water rights are based on beneficial use and priority in time, profoundly shaping property law and resource management in western states.
Unlock the full brief for Coffin v. Left Hand Ditch Co.