American Water Development, Inc. v. City of Alamosa

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the Mai court did not abuse its discretion by awarding expert witness fees
• recognizing that the right to withdraw nontributary ground water is based on ownership of the overlying land
• recognizing that it is unrealistic to expect a trial judge to evaluate and rule on every entry in a voluminous fee application and percentage cuts are a practical means of “trimming fat”
• stating that the party seeking fees bears the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that it is entitled to such an award
• “Having participated in each stage of the proceeding, the trial judge was capable of understanding what was reasonably expended in attorney fees.”
• reviewing court will uphold allocations of fees if the record affords sufficient support

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).