My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Response of CO Water Users and Officials to Motion to Stay Proceedings
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
3001-4000
>
Response of CO Water Users and Officials to Motion to Stay Proceedings
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/8/2010 9:03:30 AM
Creation date
5/21/2010 12:58:45 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
Description
Gunnison River
State
CO
Basin
Gunnison
Water Division
4
Date
9/22/2003
Author
Ken Salazar, Carol D. Angel, Bratton & McClow LLC, Moses, Wittemyer, Harrison and Woodruff P.C., Burns, Figs & Will, P.C.
Title
Response of CO Water Users and Officials to Motion to Stay Proceedings
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Court Documents
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
22
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
The McCarran Amendment waives the United States' sovereign immunity for "any suit for <br />the adjudication of rights to the use of water of a river system or other source."' The Courts have <br />found that the McCarran Amendment embodies a clear Congressional policy: <br />The clear federal policy evinced by that legislation is the avoidance of piecemeal <br />adjudication of water rights in a river system. This policy is akin to that underlying <br />the rule requiring that jurisdiction be yielded to the court first acquiring control of <br />property for the concern in such instances is with avoiding the generation of <br />additional litigation through permitting inconsistent disposition of property. This <br />concern is heightened with respect to water rights, the relationships among which are <br />highly interdependent. Indeed, we have recognized that actions seeking the <br />allocation of water essentially involve the disposition of property and are best <br />conducted in a unified proceeding. The consent to jurisdiction given by the <br />McCarran Amendment bespeaks a policy that recognizes the availability of <br />comprehensive state systems for adjudication of water rights as the means of <br />achieving these goals. <br />Colorado River, 424 U.S. at 820 (emphasis added) (citation omitted). <br />2 In relevant part, the Amendment provides: <br />(a) Joinder of United States as Defendant; Costs. Consent is given to join the United <br />States as a defendant in any suit (1) for the adjudication of rights to the use of water <br />of a river system or other source, or (2) for the administration of such rights, where <br />it appears that the United States is the owner of or is in the process of acquiring <br />water rights by appropriation under State law, by purchase, by exchange, or <br />otherwise, and the United States is a necessary party to such suit. The United States, <br />when a party to any such suit, shall (1) be deemed to have waived any right to plead <br />that the State laws are inapplicable or that the United States is not amenable thereto <br />by reason of its sovereignty, and (2) shall be subject to the judgments, orders, and <br />decrees of the court having jurisdiction, and may obtain review thereof, in the same <br />manner and to the same extent as a private individual under like circumstances: <br />Provided, That no judgment for costs shall be entered against the United States in <br />any such suit. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.