From Our Readers

Publication year1987
CitationVol. 16 No. 10 Pg. 1835
16 Colo.Law. 1835
Colorado Lawyer

1987, October, Pg. 1835. From our Readers


Vol. 16, No. 10, Pg. 1835

From our Readers

Dear Editor:

Your [Diane Hartman's] article in the July issue of The Colorado Lawyer [at page 1179] chronicling the life of Ward Bannister was excellent. Although Mr. Bannister died when I was only twelve years old, his career is well known to me and an entire generation of Wyoming lawyers who studied water law under Frank Trelease. Dean Trelease, who was also an acknowledged authority on Western water law, was greatly influenced by Mr. Bannister and it was a rare water law class when his name was not mentioned. Mr. Friedrich's marvelous characterization of Mr. Bannister's personality was revealing. I knew that Dean Trelease's philosophy of water law was heavily influenced by Mr. Bannister but I did not realize that it also carried over to his personal work habits, particularly the characterizations that he was "seldom if ever idle . . . spent his time reading, speaking and corresponding . . . was a stickler for clarity and exactness in drafting. . . ." It was very likely that Mr. Bannister had this effect on all of his associates.

Those associates and their students will keep Ward Bannister's philosophy of Western water law alive for many more generations. Thank you for taking time to assemble the information and write this wonderful article on a remarkable Colorado lawyer.

I hope that your continuing series of articles featuring outstanding Colorado lawyers is well received. It certainly reminds me of the debt we owe these remarkable people.

Very truly yours,

William Rideout, Esq.

Cheyenne, WY

Dear Editor:

I read the recent article "Cable Television Franchising Following The Cable Act" under the Local Government Newsletter department of the July issue of The Colorado Lawyer [at page 1219]. The article was well written, particularly in view of the complex subject and the brevity of the article.

However, Mr. Sindt strongly infers that a franchising authority may increase the cable operator's franchise fee from 3 percent to 5 percent upon application for transfer of the franchise. In support of this position, he cites 47 U.S.C. § 542 (Supp. 1985). There is nothing in § 542 that states or infers that an application to a franchising authority requesting transfer of a franchise permits modification of any of the terms of the franchise, including the...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT