equitable apportionment
Definitions from Case Law · United States Supreme Court
Definitions from Case Law
From 282 U.S. 660 - State of Connecticut v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts · 1931Most cited · 365 citing opinions
the principles of right and equity shall be applied having regard to the 'equal level or plane on which all the States stand, in point of power and right, under our constitutional system' and that, upon a consideration of the pertinent laws of the contending States and all other relevant facts, this Court will determine what is an equitable apportionment of the use of such waters
How the Supreme Court has restated “equitable apportionment”
Each Supreme Court definition of “equitable apportionment,” sized by how often later courts cited it. “Change” is measured by wording overlap with earlier definitions — a rough signal, not a semantic judgment.
How often courts cite the cases defining “equitable apportionment”
Court decisions citing the 3 opinions that defined “equitable apportionment” — 703 in all, by decade. Counts are citations to the defining cases as a whole, not verified uses of the term. The dip in the most recent years is a data-coverage gap, not a real trend — our corpus holds fewer opinions from the latest years.
All 3 definitions, chronological · 1931–1943
Both States have real and substantial interests in the River that must be reconciled as best they may. The different traditions and practices in different parts of the country may lead to varying results but the effort always is to secure an equitable apportionment without quibbling over formulas.
The lower state is not entitled to have the stream flow as it would in nature regardless of need or use. If, then, the upper state is devoting the water to a beneficial use, the question to be decided, in the light of existing conditions in both states, is whether, and to what extent, her action injures the lower state and her citizens by depriving them of a like, or an equally valuable, beneficial use.