Quantification Settlement Agreement Cases

Good Law
134 Cal. Rptr. 3d 274·201 Cal. App. 4th 758·2011 Cal. App. LEXIS 1530·42 Envtl. L. Rep. (Envtl. Law Inst.) 20354
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 7, 2011No. C064293California41,638 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Robie, J.

For the better part of 100 years, citizens of the American Southwest have been fighting over the right to water from the Colorado River. While the United States Supreme Court largely settled the interstate conflict over that water nearly 50 years ago, in Arizona v. California (1963) 373 U.S. 546 [ 10 L.Ed.2d 542 , 83 S.Ct. 1468 ], the court’s resolution of the dispute between the states—which limited California’s share of the river to far less than the state can use—ensured the fight would continue within the state for years to come.

*773 And so it has. In 2003, three of the major stakeholders in California’s share of the Colorado River—the Imperial Irrigation District (the Irrigation District), the Coachella Valley Water District (Coachella), and the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (Metropolitan)—purported to end a long-running series of disputes over Colorado River water by signing the “Quantification Settlement Agreement” and (along with numerous other parties) various related agreements, the purpose of which was to “budget their portion of California’s apportionment of Colorado River water among themselves” and to “provide a framework for…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.