Citation network
Nebraska Vs. Wyoming
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Apr 20, 1993
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
-
U.S. 584 (1993) October Term, 1992 Syllabus Nebraska V. WyomingSearch
-
to Wyoming. Ne braska v. WyomingSearch
-
as is the case here with respect to the Inland Lakes question, the plaintiff need not show injury. See, e. g., Wyoming v. ColoradoSearch
-
development claims, a showing of substantial injury must be made to warrant relief. Cf., e. g., Idaho ex rel. Evans v. OregonSearch
-
s arguments are foreclosed by its postdecree acquiescence in the Bureau's administration of the lakes. Cf. Ohio v. KentuckySearch
-
waters were completely apportioned between itself and Colorado by this Court's 1922 Laramie River decree. Wyoming v. ColoradoSearch
-
the river and the history of its early development are described at length in the Court's 1945 opinion. See Nebraska v. WyomingSearch
-
been modified once, pursuant to the parties' stipulation, to account for construction of a new reservoir. See Nebraska v. WyomingSearch
-
factual dispute exists, the Court views the evidence through the prism of the controlling legal standard. Anderson v. LibertySearch
-
U. S. 1017 , 1027 (1983). Accord, Colorado v. KansasSearch
-
a phrase sufficiently broad to encompass not only changes in water supply, see, e. g., Nebraska v. WyomingSearch
-
proceeding are markedly different. In an enforcement action, the plaintiff need not show injury. See, e. g., Wyoming v. ColoradoSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
the record in the prior proceedings to determine whether the Court previously resolved the issue. See, e. g., Wyoming v. ColoradoSearch
-
of balancing of equities that occurs in an initial proceeding to establish an equitable apportionment. See Nebraska v. WyomingSearch
-
strongly against reopening an apportionment of interstate water rights absent considerable justification. Cf. Arizona v. CaliforniaSearch
-
s requirement of natural flows in the pivotal reach. See Report of Michael J. Doherty, Special Master in Nebraska v. WyomingSearch
-
would agree with the Special Master that Wyoming's arguments are foreclosed by its postdecree acquiescence. Cf. Ohio v. KentuckySearch
-
are completely apportioned between Colorado and Wyoming by virtue of this Court's 1922 Laramie River decree, Wyoming v. ColoradoSearch
-
with flows down to and including the Wheatland Project, a facility upstream of Grayrocks and Corn Creek. See Wyoming v. ColoradoSearch
-
There is a statement arguably to the contrary in a subsequent decision interpreting the 1922 decree. See Wyoming v. ColoradoSearch
-
contrary language in the new Laramie decree entered on the joint motion of Wyoming and Colorado in 1957. See Wyoming v. ColoradoSearch
-
Syllabus Nebraska V. WyomingSearch
-
Evans v. OregonSearch
-
Cf. Ohio v. KentuckySearch
-
See Nebraska v. WyomingSearch
-
Anderson v. LibertySearch
-
Accord, Colorado v. KansasSearch
-
Cf. Arizona v. CaliforniaSearch
-
of Grayrocks and Corn Creek. See Wyoming v. ColoradoSearch
-
See Wyoming v. ColoradoSearch
-
Wyoming v. ColoradoSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial