1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. P.3d
  4. 64 P.3d
  5. 64 P.3d 836 (2003)
 

HOHOKAM IRR. AND DRAINAGE DIST. v. APS

No. CV-02-0091-PR.

64 P.3d 836 (2003)

204 Ariz. 394

HOHOKAM IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE DISTRICT, Pinal County, Arizona, a political subdivision of the State of Arizona, Plaintiff/Counterdefendant/Appellee, v. ARIZONA PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY, an Arizona public service corporation, Defendant/Counterclaimant/Appellant. Central Arizona Irrigation and Drainage District, a political subdivision of the State of Arizona; Electrical District No. One, Pinal County, Arizona, a political subdivision of the State of Arizona; Electrical District No. 3, Pinal County, Arizona, a political subdivision of the State of Arizona; Electrical District No. 4, Pinal County, Arizona, a political subdivision of the State of Arizona; Electrical District No. 5, Pinal County, Arizona, a political subdivision of the State of Arizona; and Maricopa-Stanfield Irrigation & Drainage District, Pinal County, Arizona, a political subdivision of the State of Arizona, Intervenors/Appellees, v. Arizona Public Service Company, an Arizona public service corporation, Defendant/Appellant. The Harquahala Power District, a political subdivision of the State of Arizona; Aguila Irrigation District, a political subdivision of the State of Arizona; McMullen Valley Water Conservation and Drainage District, a political subdivision of the State of Arizona; Buckeye Water Conservation and Drainage District, a political subdivision of the State of Arizona; Roosevelt Irrigation District, a political subdivision of the State of Arizona; Electrical District No. 7, a political subdivision of the State of Arizona; and Electrical District No. 8., a political subdivision of the State of Arizona, Intervenors/Appellees, v. Arizona Public Service Company, an Arizona public service corporation, Defendant/Appellant.

Supreme Court of Arizona, En Banc.

Clarification Denied April 22, 2003.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Brown & Bain, P.A. by Paul F. Eckstein, Dan L. Bagatell, Phoenix, Attorneys for the Petitioner, Hohokam Irrigation and Drainage District, Pinal County, Arizona.

Osborn Maledon, P.A. by Andrew D. Hurwitz, Warren Stapleton, Phoenix, Attorneys for the Respondent, Arizona Public Service Company.

Moyes Storey by Jay I. Moyes, Steven L. Wene, Phoenix, Attorneys for Maricopa County Intervenors Harquahala Power District, et al.

Law Offices of Robert S. Lynch by Robert S. Lynch, Phoenix, and Law Office of Paul R. Orme, P.C. by Paul R. Orme, Mayer, Attorneys for Pinal County Intervenors Central Arizona Irrigation and Drainage District, et al.

Gust Rosenfeld P.L.C. by Fred H. Rosenfeld, Richard A. Segal, Phoenix, Attorneys for Amicus Curiae Cortaro Marana Irrigation District.

Arizona Center for Law in the Public Interest by Timothy M. Hogan, Phoenix, Attorneys for Amicus Curiae Arizona Consumers Council.

OPINION

JONES, Chief Justice.

INTRODUCTION

¶ 1 We granted review to determine whether irrigation districts have authority, under the constitution and statutes of Arizona, to provide electricity to customers outside established district boundaries. Because we answer in the affirmative, we vacate the decision of the court of appeals and reinstate the trial court's grant of summary judgment in favor of the Hohokam Irrigation and Drainage District...

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