California Codes
Cal. Water Code § 102 (2026)
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
CA-LEGleginfo.legislature.ca.gov
JustiaCode on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
All water within the State is the property of the people of the State, but the right to the use of water may be acquired by appropriation in the manner provided by law.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 27
cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1957–2025 · leading case: Orange Cnty. Water Dist. v. Sabic Innovative Plastics United States, LLC, 47 Envtl. L. Rep. (Envtl. Law Inst.) 20099 (Cal. Ct. App. 5th 2017).
Orange Cnty. Water Dist. v. Sabic Innovative Plastics United States, LLC, 47 Envtl. L. Rep. (Envtl. Law Inst.) 20099 (Cal. Ct. App. 5th 2017). “" ( Wat. Code, § 102.) On its face, this statute would appear to confirm the State's property interest in groundwater in the South Basin.”
AIU Ins. v. Superior Court, 799 P.2d 1253 (Cal. 1990). “) In their present suits against FMC, however, the agencies do not seek recovery under this last provision, although surface and groundwater nominally owned by the state (Wat. Code, § 102) has been damaged at many of the sites where remedial action is sought, and although CERCLA…”
City of Pomona v. Sqm North Am. Corp., 750 F.3d 1036 (9th Cir. 2014). “Although California Water Code § 102 directs that all water within the state of California is the property of the people of California, Pomona maintains a usufructuary right to the water located in its wells.”
Nat'l Audubon Soc'y v. Superior Court, 658 P.2d 709 (Cal. 1983). “) Accordingly, Water Code section 102 provides that "[a]ll water within the State is the property of the people of the State, but the right to the use of water may be acquired by appropriation in the manner provided by law.”
State of California v. Superior Court, 2000 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 1704 (Cal. Ct. App. 2000). “First, Water Code section 102, enacted in 1943, provides that “All water within the State is the property of the people of the State, but the right to the use of water may be acquired by appropriation in the manner provided by law.”
Aerojet-Gen. Corp. v. Superior Court, 211 Cal. App. 3d 216 (Cal. Ct. App. 1989). “A petition for a rehearing was denied May 18, 1989, and the petition of real parties in interest for review by the Supreme Court was denied August 10, 1989.”
Shell Oil Co. v. Winterthur Swiss Ins., 12 Cal. App. 4th 715 (Cal. Ct. App. 1993). “, Water Code section 102 (“All water within the State is the property of the people of the State .”
United States v. State Water Resources Control Bd., 182 Cal. App. 3d 82 (Cal. Ct. App. 1986). “) Accordingly, Water Code section 102 provides that ‘[a]ll water within the State is the property of the people of the State, but the right to the use of water may be acquired by appropriation in the manner provided by law.”
Scott-Free River Expeditions, Inc. v. Cnty. of El Dorado, 203 Cal. App. 3d 896 (Cal. Ct. App. 1988). “X, § 4; Wat. Code, §§ 102, 1201), plaintiffs argue such waters do not constitute a species of property susceptible to a property or possessory interest tax.”
FMC Corp. v. Plaisted & Companies, 98 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 1535 (Cal. Ct. App. 1998). “” (Wat. Code, § 102; cf. AIU Ins. Co. v. Superior Court, supra, 51 Cal.”
Intel Corp. v. Hartford Acc. & Indem. Co., 692 F. Supp. 1171 (N.D. Cal. 1988). “Under California Water Code § 102 (West 1971 & 1988 Supp.”
TBG, Inc. v. Com. Union Ins., 806 F. Supp. 1444 (N.D. Cal. 1990). “This concept is codified in California Water Code § 102, which provides that “[a]ll water within the State is the property of the people of the State, .”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.