United States v. District Court in & for the County of Eagle

How courts have described this case

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

• holding a state adjudication to be general because it involves “the whole community of claims” on the river system
• noting that, because “[t]he United States was not required to appear and prove its water rights to prevent forfeiture of its claims[,] the water rights of the United States were not in issue”
• looking to legislative history to determine how \comprehensive\ Congress required the adjudications to be in order to qualify for waiver of immunity
• looking to legislative history to determine how “comprehensive” Congress required the adjudications to be in order to qualify for waiver of immunity
• “[T]he Federal Government had the 15 authority both before and after a State is admitted into the Union ‘to reserve waters for the 16 use and benefit of federally reserved lands.’”
• “All . . . questions” in state water rights adjudications “going to the merits,” “including the volume and scope of particular reserved rights, are federal questions which, if preserved, can be reviewed here after final judgment by the [state] court.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).