State of Nebraska v. State of Wyoming et al. 325 US 589 ‎(1945)‎ 325 US 589

• Description: North Platte River Decree
• State: NE
• State: WY
• Basin: North Platte
• Water Division: 6
• Date: 7/11/1945
• Author: States of Nebraska and Wyoming
• Title: State of Nebraska v. State of Wyoming et al. 325 US 589 ‎(1945)‎ 325 US 589
• Water Supply Pro - Doc Type: Compact

U.S. Supreme Court
STATE OF NEBRASKA v. STATE OF WYOMING, 325 U.S. 589 (1945)
325 U.S. 589
STATE OF NEBRASKA
V.
STATE OF WYOMING et al. (UNITED STATES, Intervener).
No. 6, Original.
Argued March 5, 6, 7, 1945.
Decided June 11, 1945.
[325 U.S. 589, 5901 Bill in equity by the State of Nebraska against the State of Wyoming for a
determination of the equitable share of the States of Nebraska, Wyoming, and Colorado in the waters of the
North Platte river and for an injunction restraining the alleged wrongful diversions, wherein the State of
Colorado filed an answer, together with a cross -bill against the State of Nebraska and the State of
Wyoming praying for an equitable apportionment between the states, and wherein the United States of
America intervened. The State of Colorado moved to dismiss the suit and a special master was appointed
and exceptions were filed to his report.
Mr. Paul F. Good, of Lincoln, Neb., for [325 U.S. 589, 591] complainant.
Mr. W. J. Wehrli, of Casper, Wyo., for defendant State of Wyoming.
Mr. Jean S. Breitenstein, of Denver, Colo., for defendant State of Colorado.
Mr. Frederic L. Kirgis, of Denver, Colo., for the United States, intervenor.
Mr. Justice DOUGLAS delivered the opinion of the Court.
Nebraska brought this suit in 1934 against Wyoming, invoking our original jurisdiction under Article III,
Section 2 of the Constitution. 293 U.S. 523 , 55 S.Ct. 115. Colorado was impleaded as a defendant. 296
U.S. 553 , 56 S.Ct. 369. The United States was granted leave to intervene. 304 U.S. 545 , 58 S.Ct. 1035.
Issues were joined. A Special Master, Honorable Michael J. Doherty, was appointed and hearings were
held beofre him. The matter is before us on exceptions to his report.
I.
The controversy pertains to the use for irrigation purposes of the water of the North Platte River, a non -
navigable stream. Nebraska alleged that Wyoming and Colorado by diversions of water from the river for
irrigation [325 U.S. 589, 592] purposes were violating the rule of priority of appropriation in force in the
three States and depriving Nebraska of water to which she was equitably entitled. The prayer was for a
determination of the equitable share of each State in the water and of the priorities of all appropriations in
both States, and for an injunction restraining the alleged wrongful diversions. Wyoming denied the
diversion or use of any water to which Nebraska was equitably entitled but joined in the prayer of Nebraska
for an equitable apportionment. Colorado filed an answer, together with a cross -bill against Nebraska and
Wyoming, which denied any use or threatened use of the water of the North Platte beyond her equitable
share, and prayed for an equitable apportionment betwe n the three States, excepting only the tributary
waters of the South Platte and Laramie rivers. 1 At the conclusion of Nebraska's case and again after all the
evidence was in, Colorado moved to dismiss the suit on the ground that the evidence was insufficient to
sustain any judgment in favor of, or against, any party. Colorado argues here that there should be no
affirmative relief against her and that she should be dismissed from the case.
The North Platte River rises in Northern Colorado in the mountainous region known as North Park. 2 It
pro- [325 U.S. 589, 593] ceeds in a northerly direction on the east side of the Continental Divide, enters