Carson City v. Estate of Lompa
Cases that cite this one
3 later published cases cite this decision.
- Dermody v. City of Reno (Nev. 1997)
- Town of Eureka v. Office of the State Engineer (Nev. 1992)
- Fallini v. Hodel (District Court, D. Nevada 1989)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion
OPINION
The City sought to condemn a parcel of real property and all water appropriated from the point of diversion located thereon as evidenced by Certificate No. 5404 issued by the State Engineer. The parties stipulated to the value of the parcel of real property and submitted to the jury only the task of deciding the value of the water right. The jury fixed that value at $33,000, which amount is not challenged. The appellant *542 does appear to contend, however, that a water right is not subject to condemnation.
When a right to use water has become fixed either by actual diversion and application to beneficial use or by appropriation as authorized by the state water law, it is a right which is regarded and protected as real property. In re Application of Filippini, 66 Nev. 17, 22, 202 P.2d 535 (1949); Nenzel v. Rochester Silver Corporation, 50 Nev. 352, 357, 259 P. 632 (1927); Adams-McGill Co. v. Hendrix, 22 Fed.Supp. 789, 791 (D. Nev. 1938); Dalton v. Bowker, 8 Nev. 190, 201 (1873). Indeed, NRS 37.010(3) specifically allows for a city to exercise its right of eminent domain to acquire water rights.
Other claimed errors have been examined and also are without merit.
Affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.