Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
7 canonical passages across 7 cases, quoted by 21 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from City of San Antonio v. Texas Water Commission.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | City of San Antonio v. Texas Water Commission Anchor | green | “water retained within a watershed is susceptible to multiple use because all water uses are not consumptive uses” | 3 |
| 2 | United States v. State Water Resources Control Board | green | “a concept embracing a wide spectrum of consumptive and non-consumptive, instream uses.” | 3 |
| 3 | County of Amador v. El Dorado County Water Agency | green | “water for hydroelectric purposes may be diverted but ultimately is returned to the water system; it is usufructuary in nature and non- consumptive.” | 3 |
| 4 | Walker v. United States | green | “use of such water as may be necessary for some useful and beneficial purpose.” | 3 |
| 5 | City of Albuquerque v. Reynolds | green | “that the surface waters of the rio grande are fully appropriated” | 3 |
| 6 | Clodfelter v. Reynolds | green | “statutory authority is necessary for a change of the point of diversion.” | 3 |
| 7 | Port of Seattle v. PCHB | green | “a type of water use where either there is no diversion from a source body, or where there is no diminishment of the source.” | 3 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.