CENTRAL ARIZONA IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE DISTRICT, Maricopa-Stanfield Irrigation & Drainage District and New Magma Irrigation and Drainage District, Plaintiffs,
v.
Manuel LUJAN and Central Arizona Water Conservation District, et al., Defendants.
United States District Court, D. Arizona.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
April 23, 1991.
April 23, 1991.
Attorney(s) appearing for the Case
William D. Baker, Robert S. Porter, Teresa H. Foster, Ellis, Baker & Porter, P.C., Phoenix, Ariz., for plaintiffs, Central Arizona Irr. and Drainage Dist., Maricopa-Stanfield Irr. and Drainage Dist. and New Magma Irr. and Drainage Dist.
Linda A. Akers, U.S. Atty., D. Ariz., Michael A. Johns, Asst. U.S. Atty., William H. Swan, U.S. Dept. of Interior, Office of Field Solicitor, Phoenix, Ariz., for defendant, Manuel Lujan, Secretary of the Interior.
Douglas K. Miller, Gen. Counsel, Suzanne K. Ticknor, Staff Atty., Central Arizona Water Conservation Dist., Ralph E. Hunsaker, O'Connor, Cavanagh, Anderson, Westover, Killingsworth & Beshears, Phoenix, Ariz., for defendant, Central Arizona Water Conservation Dist.
Marvin Cohen & Scot Stirling Sacks, Tierney, Kasen & Kerrick, P.A., Phoenix, Ariz., for City of Tucson.
Roderick McDougall, City Atty., Jesse Sears, Asst. Chief Counsel, Phoenix, Ariz., for City of Phoenix.
Barbara Goldberg, Asst. City Atty., Scottsdale, Ariz., for City of Scottsdale.
Julie Lemmon, Larry J. Richmond, Ltd., Phoenix, Ariz., for Maricopa County (Recreation & Parks).
Carol Lewin, Asst. Atty. Gen., Phoenix, Ariz., for State of Arizona (Game & Fish Com'n).
Shiela Schmidt, APS Law Dept., Robert Hoffman, Snell & Wilmer, Phoenix, Ariz., for Arizona Public Service Co.
Donald Daughton, Kathleen Ferris, Bryan, Cave, McPheeters & McRoberts, Phoenix, Ariz., for Arizona Mun. Water Users Ass'n.
M. Bryon Lewis, John Weldon Jr., Joseph Drazek, Jennings, Strouss & Salmon, Phoenix, Ariz., for Salt River Project Agr. Improvement & Power Dist. and Salt River Valley Water Users' Ass'n.
United States District Court, D. Arizona.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
ROSENBLATT, District Judge.
Pending before the Court are Motions for Summary Judgment addressing all five Counts of Plaintiffs' Complaint. Having considered the entire record and the oral arguments of counsel, the Court concludes that Defendants are entitled to Summary Judgment as to Counts I, II, III, IV, and V.
Background
On December 15, 1972, the United States entered into a combined water service and repayment...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting Sign on now to see your case. Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
Updated daily.
Uncompromising quality.
Complete, Accurate, Current.
Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full
text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.
Cited Cases
No Cases Found
Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the
full text of the citing case.
