1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. P.2d
  4. 926 P.2d
  5. 926 P.2d 1301 (1996)
 

FREMONT-MADISON IRRIGATION DISTRICT AND MITIGATION GROUP v. IDAHO GROUND WATER APPROP., INC.

Nos. 22354, 22355.

926 P.2d 1301 (1996)

129 Idaho 454

In re SRBA CASE NO. 39576. FREMONT-MADISON IRRIGATION DISTRICT AND MITIGATION GROUP, and Pioneer Irrigation District and Sinclair Oil Corporation dba Sun Valley Company, Appellants-Cross Respondents, v. IDAHO GROUND WATER APPROPRIATORS, INC., and The State of Idaho, Respondents-Cross Appellants, and The United States, Certain Upper Valley Irrigators, Big Lost River Water Users Association, Idaho Conservation Groups, J.R. Simplot Company, A & B Irrigation District, Falls Irrigation District, Burley Irrigation District, Aberdeen-Springfield Canal Company, Boise-Kuna Irrigation District, New York Irrigation District, Wilder Irrigation District, Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District, Grindstone Butte Mutual Canal Company, Rim View Trout Company and Farm Development Corporation, Respondents-Cross Respondents.

Supreme Court of Idaho, Boise, January 1996 Term.

October 2, 1996.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Elam & Burke, P.A., Boise, for appellants, Pioneer, et al. Scott L. Campbell argued.

Rigby, Thatcher, Andrus, Rigby, Kam and Moeller, Chtd., Rexburg, for appellant, Fremont-Madison Irrigation District. Jerry R. Rigby argued.

Alan G. Lance, Attorney General; Clive J. Strong, Deputy Attorney General (argued); David J. Barber, Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent, State of Idaho.

Givens, Pursley and Huntley LLP, Boise, for respondent, Idaho Ground Water Appropriators, Inc. Jeffrey C. Fereday argued.

Betty H. Richardson, U.S. Attorney, Boise; William B. Lazarus (argued), Department of Justice, Washington DC, for respondent, U.S.A.

SCHROEDER, Justice.

I.

BACKGROUND AND PRIOR PROCEEDINGS

This case addresses the constitutionality of statutes relating to the Snake River basin adjudication (SRBA), which are collectively referred to as the "amnesty statutes." I.C. §§ 42-1425, 42-1426, & 42-1427 (Supp.1995). The facts are not in dispute. Some background concerning the methods of perfecting water rights and the elements of...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

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.

Citing Cases