| OCR Text |
474 NEVADA by the various claimants which constitute their "pleadings" in the action. From this information, the engineer prepares a preliminary determination of the rights of the individual users. After serving a copy of the determination on individual users, the engineer hears any objections of the parties and takes evidence regarding any protests which are filed. The engineer's final order, together with the evidence submitted at the hearing, is filed in the appropriate district court, and forms the basis of a civil action.31 Hence, the actual adjudication takes place in the court, with the statements of the claimants and the determination proposed by the State engineer constituting the pleadings in the case.32 The findings of the engineer are entitled to great respect, and there is a presumption that they are correct;33 however, as noted above, the actual adjudication is made by the court and relief will be granted where the engineer has infringed upon a user's rights.34 While the intent of the adjudication statute is to provide a work- able and comprehensive procedure for the determination of water rights, there was some question regarding the constitutionality of the adjudication procedure under an earlier statute which purported to vest in the State engineer the power to make a conclusive adjudication of rights, even though there was a provision for ap- peal.35 Certain provisions of that statute were found to be unconsti- tutional.36 However, in 1915, the statute was amended to provide for the present procedure, and the constitutionality of the present act has been upheld in both State and Federal courts.37 A district court decree of adjudication may be appealed to the Nevada Supreme Court by the State engineer or by any interested water user, but only as provided for in the statute governing the ad- judication procedure.38 Upon the final determinination of the relative rights to the waters being adjudicated, the engineer issues certificates which define each individual right.39 The special statutory procedure discussed above is not exclusive, and individual users may obtain a determination of their respective rights in a quiet title action.40 At the time a right is initiated, a procedure is also provided for a preliminary evaluation of the rights to the available water supply. In order to obtain a right to use unappropriated water of the State of Nevada, a user must obtain an approved application from the State engineer. This procedure requires that notice of the new appli- cation be published, allows protests to be filed, and requires hearings when protests are filed. The engineer must find, among other things, that there is unappropriated water in the source and that the appli- cation will not impair the value of existing rights, or he cannot a1 Nev. Rev. Stat. Sees. 533.090 to 533.185. 82 Vineyard Land & Stock Co. v. District Court, 42 Nev. 1, 171 Pac. 166 (1918). 33 Scossa v. Church, 43 Nev. 407, 187 Pac. 1004 (1920) ; In re Barker Creek and Its Tributaries, 46 Nev. 254, 205 Pac. 518, 210 Pac. 563 (1922). a* Scossa v. Church, 43 Nev. 407,187 Pac. 1004 (1920). ^Ormsby County v. Kearney, 37 Nev. 314, 142 Pac. 803 (1914). MPitt v. Scrugham, 44 Nev. 418, 195 Pac. 1101 (1921). vtHumboldt Land & Cattle Co. v. District Court, 47 Nev. 396, 224 Pac. 612 (1924) ; Humboldt Land & Cattle Co. v. Allen, 14 F. 2d 650 (D. Nev. 1926). 88 In re Silver Creek, 57 Nev. 232, 61 P. 2d 987 (1936). 89 Nev. Rev. Stat. Section 533.265. *° Pacific Live Stock Co. v. Ellison Ranching Co., 52 Nev. 279, 286 Pac. 120 (1930). |
