Selected Published Cases

The following were published in connection with my representation of the San Carlos Apache Tribe and other Native American entities in significant water rights actions in the State of Arizona:

In Re: The General Adjudication of All Rights To Use Water in the Gila River System and Source, 127 P.3d 882 (2006) (res judicata issues); In Re The General Adjudication of All Rights to Use Water in the Gila River System and Source, 35 P.3d 68 (Ariz. 2001) (standards to quantify federal reserved Indian water rights); In Re The General Adjudication of All Rights to Use Water in the Gila River System and Source, 9 P.3d 1069 (Ariz. 2000) (“subflow” versus groundwater); The San Carlos Apache Tribe v. The Superior Court of Arizona, 972 P.2d 179 (Ariz. 1999) (comprehensive state water rights legislation held unconstitutional in special action as violating separation of powers, retroactive laws, and due process); In Re The General Adjudication of All Rights to Use Water in the Gila River System and Source, 989 P.2d 739 (Ariz. 1999) (federal reserved water rights extend to groundwater, and are protected from groundwater pumping under state law); The San Carlos Apache Tribe v. Hon. Susan R. Bolton, 977 P.2d 790 (Ariz. 1999) (special action to disqualify a judge based upon ex parte communications); United States of America v. Gila River Indian Community, 920 F. Supp. 1444 (D.Ariz. 1996) (water quality injunction entered in favor of the San Carlos Apache Tribe protecting against salinity deterioration by upstream appropriators); United States of America v. Gila River Indian Community, 804 F. Supp. 1 (Ariz. 1992) (interpreting terms of Globe Equity No. 59 Decree); United States of America v. Gila Valley Irrigation District, 117 F.3d 425 (9th Cir.1997); and United States of America v. Gila Valley Irrigation District, 31 F.3d 1428 (9th Cir. 1994).

Published Cases Involving Environmental, Constitutional and Other Issues

Some other representative published cases include: San Carlos Apache Tribe v. United States of America, 272 F. Supp.2d 860 (D.Ariz. 2003); Catholic Healthcare West Arizona v. San Carlos Apache Tribe, San Carlos Apache Tribal Court of Appeals, Case No. A-02-CV-97-101 (2003); In re Phelps Dodge Corporation Verde Valley Ranch Development, Environmental Appeals Board, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, NPDES Appeal No. 01-07, decided May 21, 2002 (2002 EPA App. LEXIS 8); Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, Inc. v. Bruce Babbitt, 51 F.3d 199 (9th Cir. 1995); Burns v. Jacquays Mining Corporation, 752 P.2d 28 (Ariz.App.1987) (future medical monitoring costs recognized as viable damages for mobile home subdivision residents living on abandoned asbestos tailings in Globe, Arizona: this was the first site to be remediated under the Superfund in Arizona); Sherman v. Bruce Babbitt, 772 F.2d 1476 (9th Cir. 1985); Baumann v. Arizona Department of Corrections, 754 F.2d 841 (9th Cir. 1985); Burrington v. Gila County, 767 P.2d 43 (Ariz.App.1988); Berry v. State of Arizona, 724 P.2d 1262 (Ariz.App. 1986); Fox v. Arizona Board of Pardons and Paroles, 717 P.2d 476 (Ariz.App.1986); Fuenning v. Super. Ct. In & For Cty. of Maricopa, 680 P.2d 121 (Ariz. 1983) ) (the leading Arizona case on the constitutionality of the DUI .10% blood alcohol law, which suppressed blood alcohol tests which failed to comply with health department regulations); State v. Miller, 497 P.2d 516 (Ariz. 1972); Campbell v. Superior Court, 479 P.2d 685 (Ariz. 1971) (representing the State of Arizona as an Assistant Attorney General, which is the leading Arizona case on the DUI implied consent law); and State v. Tinghitella, 491 P.2d 834 (Ariz. 1971).