PUB00109 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

requires the water to be appropriated, the beneficiaries to rely upon and change position based upon continued appropriation, the owner's knowledge of the right to the dedication and appropriation, and failure to make objections. Miller & Lux v. Enterprise Canal & Land Co. (1915) 169 Cal. 415, 429-430. Inverse condemnation, which allows the original owner to obtain compensation for the loss while at the same time protecting gov- ernmental interests in the use of water, is usually based upon in- tervening public use of private water rights made without obtaining title. Los Angeles v. Glendale (1943) 23 Cal.2d 68, 80. Typically, the award of damages rather than injunctive relief is available, since inverse condemnation is considered a taking of private property for which compensation must be made. Natural Soda Products Co. v. Los Angeles (1943) 23 Cal.2d 193, 204. However, injunctive relief against governmental action can be granted if the entity invoking the doctrine of inverse condemnation fails to obey court orders or pay the damages, or if the court is unabll> to determine damages fairly. Peabody, pages 377-378; Pasadena, page 920. Under the California Code of Civil Procedure, property necessary for conducting, storing, or distributing water for the use of a govern- mental entity may also be condemned. See Code Civ. Proc. ~~ 1238, 1242-1244. The power of eminent domain can be exercised by any person or organization within the state furnishing water to the pub- lic for public use, including municipalities, corporations supplying water to the public, public utilities, or water companies, although some enabling acts place restrictions on the use of the power. Code Civ. Proc. ~~ 1245.210 et seq. Compensation must be made to the owner of water rights when these rights are condemned. The mea- sure of damages in an eminent domain proceeding is the market value of the property at the time the summons is issued, together with any detriment suffered by its severance from property not taken. Los Angeles v. Pomeroy (1899) 124 Cal. 597, 641-644; People by and through Dept. of Public Works v. Lynbar, Inc. (1967) 253 Cal.App.2d 870, 880-882. The California Water System-A Capsule View California's system for managing its water resources is unique among western states. A highly complex and uncoordinated system that has evolved in piecemeal fashion over more than a century, it certainly would never have been invented in its present form. From 1850, when California became a state, until 1914, the regulation of water use was left entirely to the courts. Early water "law" came California's system/or managing its water resources would never have been invented in its present form. Chapter 2 Water Rights in California 67