Duane Morley Cox v. Teresa Wilhelmsen, et al.

Petitioner, an Owner on water right 25-11775, and an Applicant on Change Application 25-11775 a48940, asserts that this Petition for Certiorari Case is a Case of “First Impression” which presents three Federal Constitutional Questions to this Court which the Utah Court of Appeals and the Utah Supreme Court each declined to consider. Petitioner filed a “Complaint” seeking Judicial Review in Utah’s 1st District Court after Respondent State Engineer issued an “Order of Rejection” for Quantity Impairment which rendered 25-11775 to be “Worthless”, where the State Engineer failed to serve Mr. Cox with a copy of the Order. These three Constitutional Questions “Appeared” when the Utah 1st District Court Granted Respondent’s Motion to Dismiss Petitioner’s Complaint seeking Judicial Review of the State Engineer’s Order of Rejection which rendered Petitioner’s Water Right to be “Worthless”, where Judicial Review on the Agency Action, although mandatory under the 5th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, became “Unavailable” to Petitioner Cox (See Similarly Cochran v. Kansas and Dowd v. United States ex rel. Cook where “Remand” was ordered by this Court). A. First Constitutional Question: “Does the Order of the District Court Granting Respondents Motion To Dismiss Violate Petitioner’s Due Process Rights Under the 5th Amendment to The U.S. Constitution?”