Tribe's water rights case rejected
But court admits challenge raises conflict issues in decades-long process The
Spokesman-Review (Associated Press) BOISE, Idaho - 6/5/02-- The state Supreme Court on Tuesday dismissed
the challenge of the Nez Perce Tribe to former Snake River Water Rights
Adjudication Judge Barry Wood because Wood is no longer presiding over
the case.
But the high court said there were considerable issues in the claims
lodged by the Nez Perce over the water rights claims of Wood and members
of his family.
"The issues that have been raised in this case concerning the
interests of Judge Wood and his family have alerted judges to the
concerns of the Nez Perce Tribe and other litigants," Justice
Gerald Schroeder wrote for the court.
"Steps have been taken to make full disclosure of interests that
might influence a decision," he wrote.
Two years ago, the tribe asked Wood to disqualify himself from
considering its 1,886 claims for half the natural flow of springs and
fountains on former reservation lands ceded in a 1863 treaty.
The claims were consolidated and delegated to Special Master Terrence
A. Dolan, but the adjudication judge still has administrative
responsibility.
The tribe contended that Wood and two family members had water rights
claims in the adjudication that were in direct conflict with its claims.
But Wood refused to step aside, arguing that the claims in question
had already been decreed or were uncontested.
The tribe appealed, but it became meaningless 17 months ago, when the
Supreme Court removed Wood for unrelated reasons from the adjudication
and assigned the case to Judge Roger Burdick.
The adjudication of 150,000 water rights claims in 38 of the 44
counties is nearing the end of its second decade and has already cost
$56 million.
The high court replaced Wood after Wood's brother-in-law, Daniel
Eismann, was elected to the Supreme Court.
Had Wood continued presiding over the adjudication, Eismann would
have had to disqualify himself from every appeal, and the adjudication
and water rights were among Eismann's primary election campaign issues.
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, any copyrighted work in this message is distributed under fair use without profit or payment for non-profit research and educational purposes only. [Ref. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml] |