Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
- Keyword
-
- Construct (4)
- Contract (4)
- Effective (4)
- Fund (4)
- Implement (4)
-
- Interior (4)
- Irrigate (4)
- Lease (4)
- OMR (4)
- Operations Maintenance & Repair (4)
- Secretary (4)
- Tribe (4)
- US (4)
- AFY (3)
- Acre-feet per year (3)
- Agree (3)
- Allocate (3)
- Allot (3)
- Appropriate (3)
- Authorize (3)
- CO (3)
- Canal (3)
- Capacity (3)
- Capita (3)
- Conserve (3)
- Consumptive (3)
- Cost (3)
- Decree (3)
- Deliver (3)
- Develop (3)
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 18 of 18
Full-Text Articles in Law
Solicitor Tarr Opinion--Pueblo Of Sandia Boundary, Ralph W. Tarr
Solicitor Tarr Opinion--Pueblo Of Sandia Boundary, Ralph W. Tarr
Sandia Pueblo Mountain Claim
"'The Pueblo claims that approximately 10,000 acres of land were incorrectly excluded from a patent issued to the Pueblo by the United States in 1864 because the surveyor erred in not including all of the land originally granted the Pueblo by the Spanish in 1748. The major portion of the land claimed is managed by the United States Forest Service as parts of the Cibola National Forest and the Sandia Mountain Wilderness. The claimed area includes 665 acres of private inholdings (the ""inholdings"", the ""private inholders"", or the ""inholders""), as well as the Juan Tabo Recreation Area. The Pueblo requests …
Clean Water Act Citizens Suits After Gwaltney: Applying Mootness Principles In Private Enforcement Actions, Reed D. Benson
Clean Water Act Citizens Suits After Gwaltney: Applying Mootness Principles In Private Enforcement Actions, Reed D. Benson
Faculty Scholarship
The Supreme Court recently held that a citizen plaintiff must make a good-faith allegation of an ongoing violation in order to bring an enforcement action under the Clean Water Act. The decision in Gwaltney of Smithfield, Ltd. v. Chesapeake Bay Foundation, Inc., will prevent citizens from bringing suit for the assessment of civil penalties solely for past violations of the Clean Water Act.
San Luis Rey Indian Water Rights Settlement Act Of 1988, United States 100th Congress
San Luis Rey Indian Water Rights Settlement Act Of 1988, United States 100th Congress
Native American Water Rights Settlement Project
Federal Legislation: San Luis Rey Indian Water Rights Settlement Act of 1988, PL 100-675, 102 Stat. 4000 (Nov. 17, 1988). Parties: La Jolla Band of Luiseno Indians, Pala Band of Luiseno Mission Indians, Pauma Band of Luiseno Mission Indians, Rincon Band of Luiseno Mission Indians, San Pasqual Band of Diegueno Mission Indians, located in San Diego County, CA, US, CA, Escondido Mutual Water Company and Vista Irrigation District. The federal legislation was passed before the settlement agreement was developed. The purpose of the Act is to develop a reliable source of water for the Bands and to resolve their federal …
Colorado Utes Indian Water Rights Settlement Act Of 1988, United States 100th Congress
Colorado Utes Indian Water Rights Settlement Act Of 1988, United States 100th Congress
Native American Water Rights Settlement Project
Federal Legislation: Colorado Ute Indian Water Rights Settlement Act of 1988 (PL 100-585, 102 Stat. 2973) The DOI Secretary is authorized to supply water from the Animas-La Plata and Dolores Projects, which cannot be sold or leased into the Lower Colorado River Basin except under limited circumstances. The Tribes can transform a water right into a "CO State water right" and then sell or lease it. Colorado River Compact restrictions apply. The Act disapproves characterization in the Agreement of water rights which may be used off the Reservation as “project reserved water right” or “non-project reserved water right” any claims …
Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community Water Rights Settlement Act Of 1988, United States 100th Congress
Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community Water Rights Settlement Act Of 1988, United States 100th Congress
Native American Water Rights Settlement Project
Federal Legislation: Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community Water Rights Settlement of 1988, PL 100-51, 102 Stat 2549 (Oct. 22, 1988) Parties: US, Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community The US originally gained trustee control of water rights of Community through Kent decree of 1910 and Bartlett Dam Agreement of 1935. The Community's rights are a part of the Gila River System adjudication. Settlement Agreement resolved water right issues of the parties among and between them, quantified the Community’s water rights, and prescribed how to resolve any remaining claims the Community or allottees may have against the US. Neighboring communities will transfer …
Air Pollution, Ruth L. Kovnat
A Landmark Global Treaty At Montreal, Richard Elliot Benedick
A Landmark Global Treaty At Montreal, Richard Elliot Benedick
Natural Resources Journal
No abstract provided.
Front Matter, Natural Resources Journal
Front Matter, Natural Resources Journal
Natural Resources Journal
No abstract provided.
A Salute To The National Seashore System At Half-Century, Margaret Sanner, Carl Tobias
A Salute To The National Seashore System At Half-Century, Margaret Sanner, Carl Tobias
Natural Resources Journal
No abstract provided.
Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community Water Rights Settlement Agreement Of 1988, Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community Et Al
Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community Water Rights Settlement Agreement Of 1988, Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community Et Al
Native American Water Rights Settlement Project
Settlement Agreement: Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community Water Rights Settlement Agreement of 1988. Parties: US, AZ, Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community, Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement and Power District, Salt River Water Users Association, Roosevelt Water Conservation District, Roosevelt Irrigation, Chandler, Glendale, Mesa, Phoenix, Scottsdale, Tempe, Gilbert,Central AZ Water Conservation District. Contains stipulations, sources of water, expected groundwater recharge, Kent water, Bartlett Dam water, spill water, contracts with cities such as Phoenix, limitations on use, CAP water leasing and multiple exhibits.Exhibits 2.17-3.d of SRPMIC Settlement includes a "Map of SRPMIC Reservation" and several cases: Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community v. …
When Can The Government Issue A Retroactive Medicare Reimbursement Rule? A Preview Of Bowen V. Georgetown University Hospital, Robert L. Schwartz
When Can The Government Issue A Retroactive Medicare Reimbursement Rule? A Preview Of Bowen V. Georgetown University Hospital, Robert L. Schwartz
Faculty Scholarship
The only issue before the Court is whether the Secretary of Health and Human Services can issue a regulation with entirely retroactive effect governing Medicare reimbursement for healthcare providers. The Court must decide whether such a retroactive rule is permitted by the Administrative Procedures Act (the "APA"), which defines a rule as "an agency statement of either general or particular applicability and future effect," or by the Medicare statute, which authorizes the Secretary to issue regulations to provide for the reimbursement of the "reasonable costs" of hospitals providing Medicare services.
Chronicling A Movement For Civil Rights, James W. Ellis
Chronicling A Movement For Civil Rights, James W. Ellis
Faculty Scholarship
Review of the book, The Mentally Disabled and the Law, by Jan Brakel Samuel, John Pary, and Barbara A. Weiner.
When Must A Hospital Challenge The Medicare Reimbursement Policy?, Robert L. Schwartz
When Must A Hospital Challenge The Medicare Reimbursement Policy?, Robert L. Schwartz
Faculty Scholarship
The Issue for the Court is whether the Medicare statute permits hospitals that do not formally request Medicare reimbursement for particular items in the cost reports filed with their fiscal intermediaries (who audit the reports) to seek reimbursement for those items when they appeal the fiscal intermediary's decision to the appropriate administrative board or court.
If Your Client Is Mentally Retarded, James W. Ellis, Ruth A. Luckasson
If Your Client Is Mentally Retarded, James W. Ellis, Ruth A. Luckasson
Faculty Scholarship
Introduction to defending clients who hae cognitive disabilites.
Judge Ogden Hoffman And The Northern District Court Of California, Christian G. Fritz
Judge Ogden Hoffman And The Northern District Court Of California, Christian G. Fritz
Faculty Scholarship
A transcribed speech on Ogden Hoffman and the early history of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. The author touches upon three areas of law important to Hoffman's court: admiralty, land, and Chinese immigration. Then assess the meaning of Hoffman's judgeship in contrast to that of United States Supreme Court Associate Justice Stephen J. Field.
Editor's Introduction, Ann Painter
The American Jury On Trial: Psychological Perspectives (Book Review), Leo M. Romero
The American Jury On Trial: Psychological Perspectives (Book Review), Leo M. Romero
Faculty Scholarship
Book Review of S. Kassin & L. Wrightsman, The American Jury on Trial: Psychological Perspectives (1988)
Front Matter, Natural Resources Journal
Front Matter, Natural Resources Journal
Natural Resources Journal
No abstract provided.