Legal Opinion
Stockton East Water District v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims
Decided October 31, 2011No. 04-541LPublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
MILLER, Judge.
BACKGROUND
Plaintiffs Stockton East Water District (“SEWD”) and Central San Joaquin Water Conservation District (“Central”) were involved with the provision of municipal, industrial, and agricultural water, as well as the operation and maintenance of water facilities, within California’s San Joaquin Valley — just south of Sacramento County. This ease involves a dispute over two agreements involving SEWD, Central, and the United States Bureau of Reclamation (“Reclamation”) for the appropriation of water after completion of California’s second largest…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better EnvironmentSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
- McNeil v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Karen S. Reynolds v. Army and Air Force Exchange ServiceCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1988
- Mathews v. DiazSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Keene Corp. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Petro-Hunt, L.L.C. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2012
- Klamath Irrigation District v. the United States 01-591l and 01-5910l Through 01United States Court of Federal Claims · 2013
- Mission Essential Personnel, LLC v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2012
- Rosebud Sioux Tribe v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2011
- Stockton East Water District and Central San Joaquin Water Conservation District v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2013
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.