Warning
Info
- - tl;dr
- - ICRA
- - Facts & Holding
- - DeepDive
0 0
Supreme Court of the United States - 426 U.S. 1
DeepDiveHighlight a legal term to see the definition
The case involves whether the establishment of Devil's Hole as a national monument granted federal water rights in unappropriated water. The National Park Service protested against the Cappaerts' application for permits to change the use of water from their wells under Nevada law, as their pumping was causing the water level in Devil's Hole to decrease and affecting the Devil's Hole pupfish. The United States filed a complaint seeking an injunction to limit the Cappaerts' pumping from specific wells and locations near Devil's Hole, alleging that the United States reserved the unappropriated waters for the requirements and purposes of the reservation. The District Court issued a preliminary injunction limiting pumping from specific wells to return the water level of Devil's Hole to no more than 3.0 feet below the marker. The court found that regulating the pumping could stabilize the water level at Devil's Hole and that failure to issue the injunction would result in irreparable injury to the United States, as there was a grave danger that the Devil's Hole pupfish may be destroyed. The District Court ruled that the President reserved unappropriated waters necessary for the purpose of preserving Devil's Hole as a national monument, which included the preservation of the pool and the pupfish in it. The court found that the federal water rights predated those of the Cappaerts and that the United States was not estopped. The court also determined that the public interest required granting the injunction. The District Court issued a final decree that permanently enjoined pumping that would lower the water level below the 3.0-foot level.
LSD+ Case Briefs
Features
- DeepDive for detailed case analysis
- Over 50,000 existing case briefs
- Instant briefs for another 6,000,000 cases
- Highlight dictionary for legal term definitions
- Social learning with chat and high points
Over 50,000 Cases Briefed
LSD+ gives you access to over 50,000 case briefs, more than anyone else. Be the first to email us the website of a case brief product that offers you more case briefs and we'll give you a free year of LSD+.
14-Day Free Trial
Unlimited access. Read as much content as you want during your trial with no device limitations. Cancel any time during your trial and keep access for the full 14 days.
Integrated Legal Dictionary
Lawyers and judges love to use big words. And Latin, for some reason.
Highlight a legal term in LSD Briefs and get an instant, plain English definition. Try highlighting contract or specific performance. No need to search or read through a list of definitions, simply highlight the words you don’t know and our LSDefine integration will instantly give you a definition to any of over 30,000 legal terms.
DeepDive
DeepDive allows you to explore legal cases like never before. DeepDive offers multiple levels of case summaries, which empowers you to quickly and easily find the information you need to stay on top of readings. Easily navigate through summary levels and click on any text to get more detail, all the way down to the original legal case text.
Brief anything. Instantly.
Our proprietary state-of-the-art system can instantly brief over 6,000,000 US cases. That means we can probably brief that case that your professor assigned last night when she sent you a poorly scanned pdf and told you to read every third paragraph. Or maybe she uploaded it to Canvas and didn’t really tell you to read it, but you know you probably should. Tenure does wild things to good people.
Social Learning with Chat and High Points
Study groups are a great way to learn and explore a case. LSD has chat rooms for each case to let you ask questions across the community and hear what other students struggled with and how they put it all together. Learn the key points of every case from other LSD+ users and share your knowledge with LSD High Points.
Real-Time Brief Feedback
Don’t settle for mistakes in briefs that have been there for 10 years and never fixed. Find an issue or something missing from a brief? Down vote and we will make improvements. All of our case brief editors graduated from from T14 law schools.