MORONGO BAND v. State Water Resources Control Bd.

Is a water right holder facing license revocation by the State Water Resources Control Board (Water Board) deprived of due process of law when the revocation is being prosecuted by the same attorney who simultaneously acted as legal advisor to the Water Board in an unrelated administrative proceeding? The trial court answered this question in the affirmative. Relying on Quintero v. City of Santa Ana (2003) 114 Cal.App.4th 810 , 7 Cal.Rptr.3d 896 ( Quintero ) as controlling precedent, the court issued a writ of mandate ordering the disqualification of Water Board Attorney Samantha Olson as a prosecutor, in the case.

The Water Board appeals, claiming that (1) Quintero was wrongly decided and should not be followed by this court, and (2) Quintero is distinguishable and did not require disqualification of Attorney Olson from acting as prosecutor in the revocation proceeding.

We decline the Water Board's invitation to part company with Quintero . We also conclude that the trial court correctly followed Quintero and other precedents in ordering Attorney Olson disqualified. We shall affirm.

On April 28, 2003, the Water Board issued a "Notice of Proposed Revocation" of water…