| Show A water suit the case of phebe T kimball et al vs theodore Bar burmester was being heard before judge boreman today the plaintiffs claim that for upwards of twenty years a certain spring abrio g of 0 fresh water that runs from a spring in cooleys colleys Coo leys lane grantsville Grants ville tooele thoele anty has been used ud oaland belong in inz to the estate of the late it P kim b ball 1 for irrigating purposes they f urther further allege aldege that on or about the 27 th day of may 1887 the defendant willfully and maliciously and without right took turned and diverted the said water and wilfully and maliciously destroyed the ditch and dams and wilfully turned said water on to his own 0 w a land Is nd 11 damages to the amount of is ia asked by the plaintiffs and a as a the defendant thre threatens to continue in his bis restraining order is applied for or to prevent his bis so dome doing the jhb defendant claims that about the of t may 1887 the plaintiffs broke his ditch and used ibe he stream of et water in dispute thereby damaging him in the sum of he further avers that he be and not the plaintiffs held the right to the use ot of the vater quite a number of bitne witnesses bases are before the court and the hearing bearing has not yet concluded |
