OCR Text |
Show SPECIAL STATUTORY ADJUDICATION PROCEDURES 451 adjudication statutes of Wyoming and Nebraska, the validity of which had been sustained by the supreme courts of those States, the Texas Supreme Court pointed out that in Wyoming the State constitution was the applicable authority, and in Nebraska, although with a differently constituted administra- tive agency, the supreme court felt constrained to follow the Wyoming lead. The Texas Constitution contained no such provision as that of Wyoming. Hence the Texas Supreme Court refused to give controlling effect to these decisions.31 Years later, in an oil and gas case, the Texas Supreme Court decided a parallel question of fundamental policy as to which the McKnight decision was held not to be controlling.32 The policy change resulted from adoption of a constitutional amendment33 after the effective date of the statutes found objectionable in the McKnight case.34 In 1967, the legislature enacted provisions35 similar to the Oregon system discussed later. The validity of the California statute authorizing courts of the State to refer water rights issues to the State administrative agency36 was attacked and its constitutionality was upheld by the California Supreme Court. According to the court:37 Neither the section nor the order of the trial court may be construed as vesting in or delegating to the Division of Water Resources any judicial power. The division operates merely in an advisory capacity to the court, and the court itself performs the judicial function of finally determining the issues and rendering the decision and judgment. It must be taken as settled that the division does not exercise judicial functions. Some Principal Variations in Statutory Adjudication Proceedings Some of the principal types of systems with respect to statutory adjudication proceedings include the Colorado, Wyoming, Oregon, and Bien 31\Board of Water Engineers v. McKnight, 111 Tex. 82, 229 S.W. 301 (1921). 32Corzelius v. Harrell, 143 Tex. 509, 186 S.W. (2d) 961 (1945). This case is briefly discussed in a subsequent lower appellate court case involving water resources. State v. Starley, 413 S.W. (2d) 451, 460 (Tex. Civ. App. 1967). "Tex. Const, art. XVI, § 59(a), adopted August 21, 1917, which provides, "The conservation and development of all of the natural resources of this State * * * are * * * hereby declared public rights and duties; and the Legislature shall pass all such laws as may be appropriate thereto." 34 For a more detailed discussion of these matters in Texas, see Hutchins, W. A., "The Texas Law of Water Rights" 477-484 (1961). See also the Texas State summary in the appendix. 35Tex. Rev. Civ. Stat. Ann. art 7542a (Supp. 1970). 36Cal. Water Code § 2000 (West Supp. 1970). "Fleming v. Bennett, 18 Cal. (2d) 518, 523-524, 116 Pac. (2d) 442 (1941). |