Legal Opinion
Millview County Water District v. State Water Resources Control Board
California Court of Appeal
Decided September 11, 2014No. A139481PublishedCited by 21 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
MARGULIES, Acting P. J.
In 2001, plaintiff Millview County Water District (Millview) began diverting water from the Russian River under the authority of a pre-1914 appropriative water right assigned to Millview by plaintiffs Thomas Hill and Steven Gomes. On the basis of a citizen complaint, and following an evidentiary hearing, defendant State Water Resources Control Board (Board) issued a cease and desist order (CDO) substantially restricting Millview’s diversion of water under the right, finding it had been largely forfeited by a period of diminished use from 1967 through 1987.…
2Cases cited46 opinions
- Soukup v. Law Offices of Herbert HafifCalifornia Supreme Court · 2006
- Cassim v. Allstate InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 2004
- National Audubon Society v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1983
- Temescal Water Co. v. Department of Public WorksCalifornia Supreme Court · 1955
- State Water Resources Control Board CasesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2006
41 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Siskiyou County Farm Bureau v. Department of Fish & WildlifeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2015
- Orange Cnty. Water Dist. v. Sabic Innovative Plastics United States, LLC, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2017
- Millview Cnty. Water Dist. v. State Water Res. Control Bd., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2016
- People v. DavisCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2016
- United States v. US Board of Water Comm'rCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2018
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.