Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 82 N.M. 416 - Langenegger v. Carlsbad Irrigation District

Langenegger v. Carlsbad Irrigation District’s Empirical Analysis

1971

Citation profile

14
cited by 14 later decisions
1
states following
April 2006
most recently cited

14 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently April 2006

14 state decisions

601971198019902000decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on Templeton v. Pecos Valley Artesian Conservancy District · Clodfelter v. Reynolds · Application of Brown · Worley v. United States Borax and Chemical Corp. · Appeals of Durand v. Reynolds

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “It is applicants' position that they are merely exchanging rights to X number acre-feet of water in the "Nine-Mile Draw" (Move-From) area for X number acre-feet of water at the proposed well location (Move-To) sites. They contend that since there is a common source, the "valley fill," they cannot impair existing rights. . . . Applicants did not prove that the water in the "Nine-Mile Draw" area flows evenly to the site of the proposed well locations! To the contrary, the record yields expert testimony that certain amounts of the water that would be taken by the proposed wells never contributed to the water taken in the "Nine-Mile Draw" area. Assuming such to be true, the effect of applicants' application, if granted, would be to grant a new appropriation to water in which they did not previously have any rights.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “If this language found in the Durand decision means a change in point of diversion can legally be accomplished only if the waters to be taken from a proposed point of diversion are identical with the waters that have been taken from a presently established point of diversion, then there could be very few, if any, changes in points of diversion.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “that priorities must be asserted in order to protect the rights of senior appropriators, then the senior appropriators must enforce their rights in a proper manner, and, if necessary, in a proper proceeding.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.