Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Kansas water law
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Kansas water law
Introduction In a recent opinion, the Kansas Court of Appeals addressed the meaning and status of Kansas water law. The case of Garetson Brothers v. American Warrior, Inc., 51 Kan. App. 2d 370 (2015), concerns a groundwater dispute between senior water users and junior water users in southwest Kansas. After filing a complaint against the junior users, the senior users sought an injunction to stop the pumping of groundwater. The District Court granted the injunction and the Court of Appeals affirmed their decision. The issues in the case concerned what the term impairment means in the context of water law and whether it is appropriate for a court to grant injunctive relief to a senior water user. The Court of Appeal’s decision upholds the principle …show more content…
AWI presented two arguments against the injunction, 1) that it fails to maintain the statutes quo, and 2) that it does not serve to cure the Plaintiff’s injury. The Court of Appeals first found that an injunction should attempt to preserve the period when there were no issues between the parties, which in this case, was when AWI pumped less water. Second, the Court of Appeals found that an injunction need not cure the Plaintiff’s injury, but instead should serve to guard against future injury. While AWI alone may not be causing the entire drawdown, stopping their pumping should increase the overall supply of groundwater. In general, the Court of Appeals found that the District Court correctly applied the law in granting the injunction. After Garetson, senior waters users will find that injunctive relief will be a strong and available tool in future water disputes.
Conclusion Going forward, the Court of Appeal’s decision in Garetson Brothers v. American Warrior will stand for the proposition that Kansas water laws mean what they say. Rather than consider any economic considerations, the only relevant factors will be who has the senior water right and whether an impairment has occurred. As groundwater becomes scarcer in Kansas, senior water users will likely find that Kansas laws will serve to protect their use over any junior water
(Cheeseman2013) In the National Labor Relation Board v Shop Rite Foods case some employees of Shop Rite Foods of Texas elected a worker union as a Bargaining agent for a collective bargaining agreement for over 3 months the agreement was still not settled. Then ShopRite began to notice a lot of it merchandise being damaged in the warehouse. They determined that the damage was being intentionally being caused by dissident employees as a pressure tactic to secure concessions from the company in the collective bargaining negotiations.
On February 26th 1972, Dam 3 of the Buffalo Mining Company a subsidiary of the Pittston Coal Company, failed resulting in a flooding of the Buffalo Creek Hallow. The disaster caused property damage, wrongful death, and psychic impairment. West Virginia prohibited any dam built any dam built over “fifteen feet in height across any stream or watercourse without a prior determination by the state that it is safe” (15). The state’s failure to properly enforce this law gave Pittston the ability to claim the disaster was an act of God; this was supported by President Nixon who referred to this as a natural disaster (187). In his testimony Mr. Spotte, head of the Pittston Coal Group, stated the accident was a natural occurrence beyond the company’s control. However he admitted that this particular dam (3) was not built in the custom of the company other dams lacking a spillway system. This failure to ensure a standard constituted a negligent breach of duty (134-137).
Belanger v. Swift Transportation, Inc. is a case concerned with the qualified privilege of employers. In this case Belanger, a former employee of Swift Transportation, sued the company for libel in regard to posting the reason for his termination on a government data website accessible to other potential employers. Swift has a policy of automatic termination if a driver is in an accident, unless it can be proved that it was unpreventable. When Belanger rear ended another vehicle while driving for Swift the company determined the accident was preventable, while Belanger maintained it was not. Upon his termination Swift posted on a database website for promoting highway safety that he was fired because he “did not meet the company’s safety standards,”
Wolford General Partnership (WGP) operates plumbing supply business which is also an exclusive supplier for certain stable construction firms. Because of its excellent reputations and services, WGP is able to an extremely profitable entity for the business. WGP uses an accrual method of accounting and has been using June 30 fiscal year for the tax report purpose after its election of §444 since its formation.
Wagner, F. D. (2010). McDonald et al. v. City of Chicago, Illinois, et al.. Supreme Court of the United States, 1, 1-214. Retrieved May 4, 2014, from http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-1521.pdf
This Paper will describe and analyze three articles pertaining to the ongoing debate for and against Glen Canyon Dam. Two of these articles were found in the 1999 edition of A Sense of Place, and the third was downloaded off a site on the Internet (http://www.glencanyon.net/club.htm). These articles wi...
Remy, Richard C., Gary E. Clayton, and John J. Patrick. "Supreme Court Cases." Civics Today. Columbus, Ohio: Glencoe, 2008. 796. Print.
What we have seen in late January has proved that the city of Phoenix needs one more water treatment facility. The tax revenue that will be lost if a water crisis every happen again will pay for the building of the new facility. The water department has known of this problem for years but has chosen not to rectify the hazard. City officials chalked up the high levels of sediment in the water to Mother Nature, but they acknowledge that a series of decisions by water officials could have worsened the problem. (Villa, Fehr-Snyder, 1) The water department knew and Frank Fairbanks knew that maintenance was required on rotating bases, on each facility and chooses to take two offline during the “winter” or “rainy months”.
Texas, with its abundances of natural resources, is facing a new demon, one that doesn’t even seem possible, a shortage of water. Water, without it nothing can survive. Texas is the second largest state for landmass in the nation and ninth for water square miles. Within the borders of Texas are more than 100 lakes, 14 major rivers, and 23 aquifers, so why has water become such an important issue for the state? Politicians and conservationists all agree that without a new working water plan, the state could be facing one of the most damaging environmental disasters they have ever seen. The issues that shape the states positions are population growth, current drought conditions, and who actually owns the water.
---. “The Clean Water Act—Is it Successfully Reducing Water Pollution?- Final Draft.” UTSA: WRC 1023, 11 Apr 2014. Print.
W.R. Grace, the company that contaminated the water, is guilty of negligence. The company failed to take reasonable care to protect the community of Woburn from harm. I personally see three main elements of negligence in this court case. The elements are duty, proximate cause, and damages.
For about five years California has experienced above average temperatures and a lack of rain. This lack of rain and snowfall has caused California to become increasingly dry, starting arguments over whose right to water is more important and who needs to be more mindful with their use of water. Farming in California truly began during the gold rush when water was redirected to land where food was grown for those looking for gold (Siegler, 2015). The farmers that have stayed on that land now have senior water rights (“Water wars”, 2015). Farmers that settled their land before 1914 are those with senior water rights (Terrell, 2015). Governor Jerry Brown has called for a cut in water use by one-quarter percent to people living
This would handicap low income residents and independent farmers when trying to pay their water bills. Larger farming monopolies such as Monsanto would be able to afford the higher price, and buy out other farming competition. In addition, larger monopolies do not have the incentive to switch over to water conserving irrigation techniques, leading them to rely on independent less regulated wells in addition to the water the state designates for them. Excessive groundwater pumping could further decrease the water table level, cause more ground level subsidence, saltwater intrusion, increase drought in neighboring areas, increases risk for sinkholes, and cause a deficiency of groundwater available to surrounding farms and communities. If it reached an extreme enough level, they could be investigated for an environmental justice infringement for damages to the environment as well as abusing the shared natural
Water in Loudoun County has become a very expensive commodity. Loudoun Water created and started a new, three-tiered billing system. The tiered system with the first tier charges customers who use less than 25,000 gallons $1.77 per 1,000 gallons used; the second tier charges customers using 26,000 to 50,000 gallons $4.96 per 1,000 gallons and tier three charges $6.65 per 1,000 gallons for usage exceeding 50,000 gallons (Hager, 2010). Following a classic neoclassical economics, residents who use a lot of water with pay a higher rate.
The. Drinking Water: A History. New York: Overlook Duckworth, 2012. Print. The.