State Ex Rel. State Engineer v. Com'r of Public Lands

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• rejecting unsupported proposition “that by retaining oversight or enforcement power over a state’s disposition of its trust lands, the federal government also retains the title to the land” as needed to reserve federal water rights
• rejecting unsupported proposition “that by retaining oversight or enforcement power over a state’s disposition of its trust lands, the federal government also retains the title to the land” as needed to reserve federal water rights
• “[I]n recognition of . . . the potentially substantial and detrimental impact on state rights in fully appropriated stream systems, courts must construe the doctrine of federal reserved water rights narrowly.”
• “Although we do not deny that the support of common schools is a matter of national interest, we cannot conclude that it is also a federal purpose in the context of the implied federal water rights doctrine.”
• “Although we do not deny that the support of common schools is a matter of national interest, we cannot conclude that it is also a federal purpose in the context of the implied federal water rights doctrine.”
• “The appropriation of water for beneficial use establishes the priority date of a water right in relation to other water rights, and the full right of an earlier appropriator will be protected, to the extent of that appropriator’s use, against a later appropriator.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).