Laserfiche WebLink
<br />~ <br /> <br />the trial date indefinitely was worked out by the parties <br /> <br /> <br />and the court issued an order adopting the stipulation. <br /> <br />The case remains stayed pending the supreme court ruling in <br /> <br />the Division 4, 5, and 6 cases. <br /> <br /> <br />It is 1 ikely that the supreme court will recognize <br /> <br />the reserved rights theory and allow the united States to <br /> <br /> <br />assart those reserved rights claims. If that is the case, <br /> <br /> <br />the Water Division No.7 findings of the law of the caS6 <br /> <br /> <br />would be vacat6d and we would start anew with the Water Divi- <br /> <br /> <br />sion No.7 cases. <br /> <br />III. Lf~~L_l~~Uf~ <br />A. G~Q~Lall~ <br />The reservea rights doctrin~ is a judicially cre- <br />ated doctrine which has gradually evolved since its original <br />formulation in UL~L_~L_WiU~~~t 207 U.S. 564 (1908). The <br />doctrine holds that when the federal government reserves <br />land from the public do~ain for a federal purpose that there <br />is an implied reservation of unappropriated water in an <br />amount sufficient to fulfill the purposes of that reserva- <br />tion. ~2Q22~Lk_~L_Uuit~~_~t~~~t 426 U.S. 128 (1976). <br />The Court will infer the intent to reserve water only <br />wnen the purpose of the reservation would be defeated without <br />such an implied reservation. 'uuit~~~t~t~~_~_~~~_~~i~Q' <br />-4- <br />