Legal Opinion · Dissent

State, Dept. of Parks v. IDAHO DEPT, WATER ADMIN.

Idaho Supreme Court

Decided December 31, 1974No. 11455Published

1DissentMcQUADE, Justice

I join in the dissent of Justice McFadden, but feel compelled to address myself to an issue which was not passed upon in his dissent. I do not agree with the majority’s position that there may be created a valid appropriative water right in the absence of an actual physical diversion of the water from its natural locus or condition.

A diversion is generally required in order to perfect water rights by appropriation.1 Hutchins in his treatise on water rights in the western states2 quotes with approval the following language from a California case,

“To constitute a valid appropriation of water,…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Nielson v. ParkerIdaho Supreme Court · 1911
  2. Hutchinson v. Watson Slough Ditch Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1909
  3. Clough v. WingArizona Supreme Court · 1888
  4. Sand Point Water & Light Co. v. Panhandle Development Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1905
  5. Sherlock v. GreavesMontana Supreme Court · 1938

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API