Mealey's Water Rights

  • June 10, 2021

    EPA, Army Corps Seek Remand Of Trump Clean Water Rule Pending New Rulemaking

    BOSTON — The Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers on June 9 asked a Massachusetts federal court to voluntarily remand the Trump administration’s Clean Water Rule to the agencies because they decided after review to begin the rulemaking process to revise or replace the rule.

  • June 09, 2021

    California Appeals Court Affirms Vacated Water Rate Increase, Attorney Fees

    SACRAMENTO, Calif. — The California Third District Court of Appeal on May 28 affirmed a trial court ruling that a rate hike by a water district violated the state constitution and that the plaintiffs are due $66,000 in state private attorney general fees for conferring a substantial benefit to more than 7,500 ratepayers.

  • June 08, 2021

    Clean Water Act Suit Stayed Again Pending ‘Next Step’ June 9 By EPA, Army Corps

    ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. — A New Mexico federal judge on May 26 granted a motion by the Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to stay until July 1 a case challenging the Clean Water Act (CWA) until the new leadership of the EPA announces its “next step” with regard to interpretation of the law.

  • June 08, 2021

    Multiplaintiff, Interstate Or Notable Water Rights Cases

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

  • June 08, 2021

    Environmentalists Again Seek Summary Judgment Against Trump Clean Water Rule

    CHARLESTON, S.C. — Fourteen environmental groups that last year sued the Environmental Protection Agency for finalizing the Trump administration’s version of the Clean Water Rule filed a new motion in a South Carolina federal court on May 21 to vacate the rule that seeks to define the “waters of the United States” for purposes of EPA jurisdiction.

  • June 08, 2021

    San Francisco: State Water Certification Violates Rights, Should Be Withdrawn

    SONORA, Calif. — The city and county of San Francisco and their Public Utilities Commission on May 13 filed a petition for a writ of mandamus in a California state court complaining, in part, that the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) is violating their water right priorities through a water quality certification it announced Jan. 15 during a hydroelectric project relicensing hearing.

  • June 08, 2021

    California Appeals Court Affirms $129,000 Fee Award In Groundwater Cap Challenge

    SAN FRANCISCO — A California appeals panel on May 27 affirmed $129,000 in attorney fees and costs awarded to a plaintiff who successfully challenged a water district’s groundwater cap regulation, saying the award was justified for private enforcement of the state water code and that the benefits for a class of water users outweighed the cost of the litigation.

  • June 07, 2021

    California Water District Tells U.S. High Court Farmer Gets Service, Not Right

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — A California farmer on June 2 waived the 14-day waiting period for a reply brief in his petition for a writ of certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court, invoking a court rule that will allow the court clerk to distribute his water rights petition to the court for its consideration at an upcoming conference.

  • June 04, 2021

    Congressional Amici: Trump Clean Water Rule ‘Dishonors’ Congressional Intent

    CHARLESTON, S.C. — Thirty-three current and former members of Congress on May 28 moved in South Carolina federal court to submit an amicus curiae brief in support of summary judgment that would invalidate the Trump administration’s version of the Clean Water Rule, saying the rule “dishonors” Congress’ intent in enacting the Clean Water Act and the law’s subsequent amendments.

  • June 04, 2021

    California Appeals Court: No More Fees Due To Class In Groundwater Case

    FRESNO, Calif. — A California appeals court on May 26 affirmed a coordinating court’s denial of additional attorney fees and costs totaling as much as $2.25 million for a class in the Antelope Valley groundwater adjudication, saying the applicants had not met any of the exceptions listed in a 2010 settlement of their water right claims and were not entitled to additional fees and costs under California’s private attorney general doctrine.

  • June 03, 2021

    Special Master Discharged In Florida/Georgia U.S. Supreme Court Water Case

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Supreme Court on June 1 discharged with thanks Judge Paul J. Kelly Jr. as special master for the interstate water dispute between Florida and Georgia, yet another sign that the eight-year-old controversy is over.

  • May 11, 2021

    Multiplaintiff, Interstate Or Notable Water Rights Cases

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

  • May 11, 2021

    Supreme Court Special Master Lists Sept. 13 Trial in Texas- New Mexico Water Case

    CEDAR RAPIDS, Iowa — A U.S. Supreme Court special master on April 9 issued a trial management order setting Sept. 13 as the trial start date in the Texas-New Mexico-Colorado interstate water dispute.

  • May 11, 2021

    Environmental Groups Appeal Colorado Dam Challenge To 10th Circuit

    DENVER — Six environmental groups on April 27 appealed to the 10th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals a district court’s dismissal of their challenge to a dam permit for lack of district court jurisdiction under the Federal Power Act (FPA).

  • May 11, 2021

    California Judge Won’t Remand, Reconsider Order Halting Desalination Plant Permit

    SALINAS, Calif. — A California state court judge on April 8 denied a request for interlocutory remand or limited writ of mandate following the judge’s Jan. 21 ruling setting aside a county’s approval for a desalination project to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act  (CEQA) requirement for a “statement of overriding considerations."

  • May 11, 2021

    D.C. Circuit Court Won’t Rehear Water Rights Case Involving Klamath Tribes

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — The District of Columbia federal appeals court on May 10 denied a petition to rehear a panel’s March 19 decision and to certify to the Oregon Supreme Court the question of whether a federal court cannot invalidate a protocol between a federal government and a Native American tribe to take decisions about the tribe’s water rights away from Oregon state officials and give that authority to the federal government.

  • May 11, 2021

    California Appeals Court: Interpretation Of ‘Or’ In Water Decree Is Inclusive

    SACRAMENTO, Calif. — California’s Third District Court of Appeal on April 30 said a water decree watermaster and a state superior court did not err in interpreting that the word “or” in an exception in a 1940 water decree that allows a water right holder to simultaneously divert and store water from the Susan River.

  • May 11, 2021

    U.S. Supreme Court Tells California Water District To Answer Farmer’s Petition

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — After a California irrigation district on April 9 waived its right to respond to a petition for a writ of certiorari from the U.S. Supreme Court, the high court on April 26 requested that the irrigation district file a response to a farmer’s petition asking the high court to rule on whether an irrigation district may abrogate the water rights of farmers and whether the farmers have federally protected water rights under federal law.

  • May 11, 2021

    Nevada High Court Creates Water Law Study Commission, Appoints Membership

    CARSON CITY, Nev. — The Nevada Supreme Court on April 12 announced the appointment of 24 members of the recently created Commission to Study the Adjudication of Water Law Cases.

  • May 10, 2021

    Judge Denies Tribe’s Motions For TRO, Injunction In Klamath Basin Water Case

    MEDFORD, Ore. — An Oregon federal judge on May 6 denied motions by a Native American tribe to issue a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction against the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation’s management of water in the Klamath Basin, saying that given continuing drought conditions and competing interests of multiple parties, the bureau has consulted with all interested parties and is doing the best it can under the circumstances.

Can't find the article you're looking for? Click here to search the Mealey's Water Rights archive.