Mealey's Water Rights

  • September 16, 2020

    Tribe's Suit Against Water Districts Over Water Quality Survives Dismissal Bids

    PHOENIX — Two water districts in Arizona are not entitled to dismissal of an Indian tribe's suit against them because the issues are not the same as those being decided in a state court water rights adjudication, but the tribe must add the United States as a defendant due to its contracts with the districts, a federal judge ruled Sept. 14 (Ak-Chin Indian Community v. Maricopa-Stanfield Irrigation & Drainage District, et al., No. 20-489, D. Ariz., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 167852).

  • September 08, 2020

    Montana Supreme Court: City Has No Protectable Interest In Water Right Change

    HELENA, Mont. — The Montana Supreme Court on Aug. 25 affirmed the state's approval of a water change application that the city of Bozeman alleged infringed on its protectable interests for water service to an overlapping area (Bozeman v. Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation, et al., No. DA 19-0680, Mont. Sup., 2020 Mont. LEXIS 2259).

  • September 08, 2020

    California Supreme Court Won't Review Challenge To Delta Reform Act, Council

    SAN FRANCISCO — The California Supreme Court on Aug. 12 denied a request by 12 water districts to depublish a state appellate court ruling affirming the Delta Stewardship Council's water management and land use planning authority and to review the appellate court decision  (Delta Stewardship Council Cases, No. S262908, Calif. Sup.).

  • September 09, 2020

    Oregon Federal Judge Denies Cattlemen Injunction Against Clean Water Rule Phrase

    PORTLAND, Ore. — An Oregon federal judge on Aug. 7 denied without prejudice due to a lack of standing a motion by a cattlemen’s association for a preliminary injunction against the Environmental Protection Agency and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers from enforcing the words “or intermittent” in the Trump administration’s new Clean Water Rule (Oregon Cattlemen’s Association v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, et al., No. 19-564, D. Ore.).

  • September 08, 2020

    Multiplaintiff, Interstate Or Notable Water Rights Cases

    New developments in the following multiplaintiff, interstate or notable water rights cases are marked in boldface type.

  • September 08, 2020

    Judge Denies Dismissal Of Utilities' Suit Alleging Water Monopoly By Texas District

    HOUSTON — A Texas water district on Aug. 21 appealed to a federal circuit court a district court’s Aug. 14 order denying dismissal of an antitrust complaint by two utilities that said the water district is monopolizing the water market in Montgomery County, Texas (Quadvest, L.P., et al. v. San Jacinto River Authority, No. 19-cv-4508, S.D. Texas, Houston Div., 2020 U.S. Dist. 156144; Quadvest, L.P., et al v. San Jacinto River Authority, No. 20-20447, 5th Cir.).

  • September 08, 2020

    Judge Orders California Water Board To Evaluate Reasonable Use Of Wastewater

    LOS ANGELES — A California state court judge on Aug. 4 ordered the State Water Resources Control Board to conduct an evaluation of the reasonable use of wastewater from publicly owned treatment works (Los Angeles Waterkeeper v. State Water Resources Control Board, et al., No. BS171009, Calif. Super., Los Angeles Co.).

  • September 01, 2020

    Farmer Wins Federal Court Reversal Of Tribal Court's Water Use Ruling, Damages

    SALT LAKE CITY — A Utah federal judge on Aug. 28 granted summary judgment to a farming operation and dismissed an Indian tribe's suit seeking affirmation of a tribal court water rights ruling in its favor, finding that the tribal court did not have the authority to adjudicate the dispute or award damages to the tribe (Ute Indian Tribe of the Uintah & Ouray Reservation v. Gregory D. McKee, et al., No. 2:18-cv-314, D. Utah, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 157104).

  • September 01, 2020

    Montana Supreme Court Affirms Water Court's Water Rights Ruling For 3 Ranches

    HELENA, Mont. — The Montana Supreme Court on Aug. 11 affirmed the state Water Court’s findings regarding water rights held by three ranches that trace back to the late 1800s (Little Big Warn Ranch, LLC v. Cheri L. Doll, et al., No. DA 19-0661, Mont. Sup., 2020 Mont. LEXIS 2195).

  • August 28, 2020

    California Supreme Court: CEQA May Apply To County's Well Permits

    SAN FRANCISCO — The California Supreme Court on Aug. 27 ruled that not all well permit issuances under the Stanislaus County Code are discretional but neither are they ministerial, a ruling that sends a case brought by two environmental groups back to a state appeals court (Protecting Our Water and Environmental Resources, et al. v. Stanislaus, et al., No. S251709, Calif. Sup.).

  • August 28, 2020

    California Farmer Asks State High Court To Review Imperial District Water Ruling

    SAN FRANCISCO — A California farmer on Aug. 24 petitioned the state Supreme Court to review an appellate court decision holding that farmers served by the Imperial Irrigation District have an interest in the district's water rights but don't have water rights themselves (Michael Abatti, et al. v. Imperial Irrigation District, No. S264093, Calif. Sup.).

  • August 26, 2020

    Los Angeles Water District To Pay $44.37M To San Diego District For Water Charges

    SAN FRANCISCO — A California state court judge on Aug. 13 entered final judgment in a 10-year-old water charges lawsuit, ordering the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (Metropolitan) to pay the San Diego Water Authority (San Diego) $44.37 million and declaring that certain water supply charges are invalid (San Diego Water Authority v. Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, et al., No. CPF-10-510830, Calif. Super., San Francisco Co.).

  • August 25, 2020

    Los Angeles Water District To Pay $44.37M To San Diego District For Water Charges

    SAN FRANCISCO — A California state court judge on Aug. 13 entered final judgment in a 10-year-old water charges lawsuit, ordering the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (Metropolitan) to pay the San Diego Water Authority (San Diego) $44.37 million and declaring that certain water supply charges are invalid (San Diego Water Authority v. Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, et al., No. CPF-10-510830, Calif. Super., San Francisco Co.).

  • August 25, 2020

    Federal Judge Denies 2 Clean Water Rule Intervenors; 1 Has Noticed An Appeal

    SAN FRANCISCO — Two California property owners on April 14 said they will ask an appeals court to review a district court's denial of their motion to intervene in a challenge to the Trump administration's latest Clean Water Rule (California, et al. v. Andrew Wheeler, et al., No. 20-3005, N.D. Calif., No. 20-16606, 9th Cir.).

  • August 12, 2020

    Multiplaintiff, Interstate Or Notable Water Rights Cases

    New developments in the following multiplaintiff, interstate or notable water rights cases are marked in boldface type.

  • August 11, 2020

    Nevada Tribe Gets Judgment For Additional Water Rights In Walker River Case

    RENO, Nev. — A Nevada federal judge on July 20 ruled that the Walker River Paiute Tribe is entitled to judgment as a matter of law on its claims of additional water rights under the 1936 Decree, turning back affirmative defenses raised by 13 Nevada and California defendants following a 2019 federal appeals court ruling (United States, et al. v. Walker River Irrigation District, et al., No. 73-127, D. Nev., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 128452).

  • August 11, 2020

    Utah Supreme Court Partly Reverses Trial Judgment In River Water Case

    SALT LAKE CITY — The Utah Supreme Court on July 13 reversed three parts of a trial court’s ruling in a dispute between two water companies that draw water from the Beaver River, but affirmed denial of rescission of a 66-year-old agreement (Rocky Ford Irrigation Company v. Kents Lake Reservoir Company, et al., No. 20170290, Utah Sup., 2020 Utah LEXIS 143).

  • August 11, 2020

    U.S. Supreme Court To Hear Texas-New Mexico Dispute Oct. 5 When New Term Starts

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments on Oct. 5 on a motion to review a river master’s final determination in an interstate water dispute between Texas and New Mexico, the high court announced July 13 in a hearing order (Texas v. New Mexico, et al., No. 141, Original, U.S. Sup.).

  • August 11, 2020

    State's Appeal Of Injunction Denial For 2015 Water Rule Is Moot, 6th Circuit Says

    CINCINNATI — The Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Aug. 5 dismissed as moot an interlocutory appeal by Ohio and Tennessee of a federal court’s denial of a preliminary injunction against an Obama-era Clean Water Rule, saying the rule was replaced by one issued by the Trump Administration (Ohio, et al. v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, No. 19-3500, 6th Cir., 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 24674).

  • August 11, 2020

    Federal Government, Colorado Appeal Clean Water Rule Injunction To 10th Circuit

    DENVER — The Environmental Protection Agency and the Army Corps of Engineers on July 9 told the 10th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals that a Colorado federal court erred in enjoining the Trump Administration’s Clean Water Rule and that the appeals court should vacate the injunction (Colorado v. U.S. Environmental Protection Administration, et al., Nos. 20-1238, 20-1262 and 20-1263, 10th Cir.).