Legal Opinion
Klamath Irrigation District v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims
Decided February 28, 2005No. 01-591 LPublishedCited by 22 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
ALLEGRA, Judge.
In the case sub judice, a group of water districts and individual farmers seek just compensation under the Fifth Amendment, as well as damages for breach of contract, owing to restrictions placed by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation on the use, for irrigation purposes, of the water resources of the Klamath Basin of southern Oregon and northern California. Eight organizations — Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations, Institute for Fisheries Resources, The Wilderness Society, Klamath Forest Alliance, Oregon Natural Resources Council, Water-Watch of Oregon,…
2Cases cited56 opinions
- Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Insurance Co. of AmericaSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Consolo v. Federal Maritime CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. CaseySupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Diamond v. CharlesSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Donaldson v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
51 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- Klamath Tribe Claims Committee v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2011
- Klamath Irrigation District v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2011
- Klamath Irrigation District v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2005
- Government of the United States Virgin Islands v. Commissioner of IRSCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2014
- Stovall v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2006
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.