Journal of Environmental Law & Litigation : Vol. 23, No. 1, p. 241-274 : Watering Down Federal Court Jurisdiction: What Role Do Federal Courts Play in Deciding Water Rights?
Loading...
Files
Date
2008
Authors
Wood, Alexander
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
University of Oregon School of Law
Abstract
Within the context of water rights issues, this Note discusses
how federal courts have analyzed Colorado River in deciding
whether to exercise jurisdiction or abstain because of
“exceptional circumstances.”8 Part I provides a brief overview of
judicially created abstention doctrines. Part II discusses the
tension among federal reserved water rights, the prior
appropriation doctrine, and a state’s authority over allocating its
own water. Part II also focuses on the reasons federal agencies
may choose to assert water rights claims in federal court and
how the McCarran Amendment has limited that choice.
Part III describes the Colorado River decision in detail and
analyzes how courts have applied and misapplied its doctrine
when resolving water rights issues. Part IV examines the
doctrine of prior exclusive jurisdiction, a narrow abstention
exception focusing on situations where the court that originally
adjudicated a water-rights determination, whether state or
federal, would have exclusive jurisdiction over all subsequent
adjudications concerning the same water body. Part V explains
how Colorado River abstention and the prior exclusive
jurisdiction doctrine connect in the realm of water rights conflicts. The Note concludes by providing a final assessment of
the subject at hand.
Description
34 p.
A print copy of this title is available through the UO Libraries under the call number: LAW LIB. K 10 .O425
Keywords
Citation
23 J. ENVTL. L. & LITIG. 241 (2008)