My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSPC00493
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
12000-12999
>
WSPC00493
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 10:50:06 AM
Creation date
10/9/2006 2:13:07 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8230.100.10
Description
Colorado River - Interstate Litigation - Arizona Vs California
State
AZ
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Water Division
5
Date
6/3/1963
Title
AZ Vs CA - Determination of Rights of States of the Lower Colorado River Basin to Waters of the Main Stream of the Colorado River - Opinion of the Supreme Court of the US - RE AZ Vs CA
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
100
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
<br />002175 <br /> <br />SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES <br /> <br />No. 8, ORIGINAL.~OCTOBER TERM, 1962. <br /> <br />State of Arizona, Plaintiff'l ' <br />v. Complaint. <br />State of California et al. <br /> <br />[June 3, 1963.] <br /> <br />. MR. JUSTICE BLACK delivered the opinion of the Court. <br />. .'. <br />In 1952 the State of Arizona invoked the original juris- <br />diction of this Court 1 by filing a complaint against the <br />State of California and seven of its public agencies.' <br />Later, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, and the United States <br />were added as parties either voluntarily or on motion.' <br />The ba!3ic controversy in the case is over how much water <br />each State has a legal right to use out of the waters of the <br />Colorado River and its tributaries. After preliminary <br />pleadings, we referred the case to George 1. Haight, <br />Esquire, and upon his death in 1955 to Simon H. Rifkind, <br />Esquire, as Special Master to take evidence, find facts, <br />state conclusions of law, and recommend a decree, all <br /> <br />1 "The judicial Power shall extend . . . to Controversies between <br />two or more States . . . . <br />"In all cases . . . in which a State shall be Party, the supreme <br />Court shall have original Jurisdiction." U, S, Const., Art, III, ~ 2. <br />See also 28 U. S. C, ~ 1251 (a)(I). <br />Three times previously Arizona has instituted actions in this Court <br />concerning the Colorado River. Arizona v, California, 283 U, S. 423 <br />(1931); Arizona v. California, 292 U. S. 341 (1934); Arizona v. <br />California, 298 U. S. 558 '(1936). See also United States v, Arizona, <br />295 U. S. 174 (1935). <br />2 Palo Verde Irrigation District, Imperial Irrigation District, Coa- <br />chella Valley County Water District, Metropolitan Water District <br />of Southern California, City of Los Angeles, City of San Diego, and <br />County of San Diego. , . <br />· 344 U. S. 919 (1953) (intervention by United States); 3*7 U. S. <br />985 (1954) (intervention by Nevada); 350 U. S. 114 (1955) (joinder <br />of Utah and New Mexico). <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.