Idaho Code
Idaho Code § 42-1417 (2026)
General adjudication — Interim administration of water rights.
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
IClegislature.idaho.gov
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
General adjudication — Interim administration of water rights.
(1) The district court may permit the distribution of water pursuant to chapter 6, title 42, Idaho Code:
(a) in accordance with the director’s report or as modified by the court’s order;
(b) in accordance with applicable partial decree(s) for water rights acquired under state law;
(c) in accordance with applicable partial decree(s) for water rights established under federal law.
(2) The district court may enter the order only:
(a) upon a motion by a party;
(b) after notice by the moving party by mail to the director and each claimant of water from the water system or portion thereof that could reasonably be determined to be adversely affected by entry of the order; and
(c) upon a determination by the court, after hearing, that the interim administration of water rights in accordance with the report, or as the report is modified by the court’s order, and in accordance with any partial decree(s), is reasonably necessary to protect senior water rights.
(3) Immediately upon entry of the court’s order of interim administration of water rights, the clerk of the district court shall mail a certified copy of the order to the director, and the director shall immediately give notice of the order to the watermaster of the water districts affected by the order.
(4) After entry of the district court’s order for interim administration, the director may form a water district pursuant to chapter 6, title 42, Idaho Code.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2
cases, 2009–2009 · leading case: Thompson Creek Mining Co. v. Idaho Dep't of Water Resources, 220 P.3d 318 (Idaho 2009).
Thompson Creek Mining Co. v. Idaho Dep't of Water Resources, 220 P.3d 318 (Idaho 2009). “The Director was certainly entitled to consider the WSRA as contextual information in determining whether the creation of WD170 was necessary, particularly as the WSRA is the reason the State of Idaho filed a motion for interim administration of water rights, pursuant to I.C. §…”
In Re Wd170, 220 P.3d 318 (Idaho 2009). “The Director was certainly entitled to consider the WSRA as contextual information in determining whether the creation of WD170 was necessary, particularly as the WSRA is the reason the State of Idaho filed a motion for interim administration of water rights, pursuant to I.C. §…”
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.