State Engineer of Nevada v. South Fork Band of the Te-Moak Tribe of Western Shoshone Indians

Good Law
2003 Daily Journal DAR 8299·339 F.3d 804·2003 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 6623·2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 14919
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 28, 2003Nos. 00-17146, 00-17172, 00-17173, 00-17175California3,715 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Kozinski, J.

We consider whether a state court that has adjudicated a water decree retains exclusive jurisdiction over its administration.

I

Like many Western states, Nevada follows a two-step process in determining and enforcing rights to the use of water in its river systems. First is the adjudication phase. The state engineer makes an initial determination of the relative usufruc-tuary rights to water among different claimants and files an order with the state district court having jurisdiction over the geographic region. Nev.Rev.Stat. §§ 533.090, 533.160. After holding a hearing, the court enters a decree either affirming or modifying the engineer’s order. Id. § 533.185. Barring later modifications, the judicial decree defining the distribution of water rights is “final” and “conclusive upon all persons and rights lawfully embraced within [it].” Id. § 533.210(1).

Next comes the administration phase, where the state engineer and water commissioners give practical effect to the judicial decree and distribute water rights as “officers of the court.” Id. § 533.220(1). To carry out their official duties, water commissioners have the “right of ingress and egress across and upon public,…

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.