Farmers Development Co. v. Rayado Land & Irrigation Co.

Citations

• 18 N.M. 1

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS (BY THE COURT).</p> <p>1. Assignments of error that “the court below erred ini affirming the decision of the Board of Water Commissioners,” and that “the court below erred in rendering judgment herein in favor of said appellee, affirming the said decision of the Board of Water Commissioners,” are not sufficiently specific to present any guestion for review.</p> <p>P. ¿</p> <p>2. Under chap. 49, S. L. 1907, from any act or refusal to act of the state engineer, the aggrieved party may appeal to the Board of Water Commissioners, and may likewise appeal from the decision of said board to the district court: The statute contemplates a hearing or trial de novo before each board or tribunal, and not a review of the order or decision of the inferior tribunal. An assignment of error, in such a proceeding, upon appeal from a judgment of the district court, that “the court below erred in finding and adjudging that the said Board of Water Commissioners had and was possessed of the right, warrant and authority to review the discretion of the said state engineer in the mat; ter of the approval of permits to appropriate,” is therefore not well taken, because the record in this case fails to show tha,t the district court so held, or that any such issue was presented, or could have been involved in the case. , .</p> <p>P. 7</p>