law-water
TAXAS SUPREME COURT DECISIONS IN WATER LAW APPEALS
Guitar Holding Co. LP, No. 06-0904 (Tex. May 30, 2008)(David Medina) (water rights, administrative law,
challenged district rule governing water transfers found invalid)
GUITAR HOLDING COMPANY, L.P. v. HUDSPETH COUNTY UNDERGROUND WATER CONSERVATION
DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL.; from Hudspeth County; 8th district (08-04-00296-CV and 08-05-00115-CV, 209
S.W.3d 172, 08-31-06)
The Court reverses the court of appeals' judgment and renders judgment.
Justice Medina delivered the opinion of the Court.
Canyon Regional Water Authority v. Guadalupe-Blanco River Authority, No. 06-0873 (Tex. May 16,
2008)(Opinion by Paul Green) (intergovernmental dispute over easement for water extraction from lake,
condemnation power)
CANYON REGIONAL WATER AUTHORITY v. GUADALUPE-BLANCO RIVER AUTHORITY; from Guadalupe
County; 4th district (04-05-00943-CV, 211 S.W.3d 351, 06-21-06)
The Court affirms in part and reverses in part the court of appeals' judgment and remands the case to the trial
court.
Justice Green delivered the opinion of the Court.
TEXAS COURTS OF APPEALS CASES (PETITION DENIED)
09-0138
CITY OF AUSTIN, ET AL. v. NORTHWEST AUSTIN MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL.; from Travis
County; 3rd district (03-04-00240-CV, 274 SW3d 820, 11-14-08, pet. denied Sep. 2009) 2 petition motion to
amend petition for review denied
Appellants Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District No. 1, Don Zimmerman, William C. Ferguson, and Alan R.
Weiss appeal from the judgment against them in their suit to declare that an agreement executed by the District
and appellees City of Austin and City Council members (collectively, "the City") is an "allocation agreement"
under section 54.016(f) of the Texas Water Code and that the agreement violates section 54.016(f) by allowing
both the City and the District to assess and collect their full rate of property taxes. (2) The trial court granted
partial summary judgment in favor of the City, upholding the City's property tax levy and collection of taxes.
Because we hold that the agreement is an allocation agreement as a matter of law, we reverse the district court's
order in part and render summary judgment in favor of the District on this issue. However, because summary
judgment is improper as to the parties' remaining declaratory claims, we reverse this portion of the judgment and
remand for further proceedings.
Because we hold that the Agreement between the City and the District is an allocation agreement under Texas
Water Code section 54.016(f) and that section 54.016(f) applies to this Agreement, we reverse the summary
judgment in part and render judgment in favor of the District on this issue. Furthermore, because the District's
suit for declaratory judgment was not barred by the statute of limitations or laches, we reverse this portion of the
summary judgment and remand the parties' remaining declaratory claims for further proceedings consistent with
this opinion. We conclude that the district court properly granted the City's plea to the jurisdiction as to the
individual plaintiffs for lack of standing and affirm the district court's order dismissing their suit. In light of our
disposition reversing the summary judgment in part, we reverse the award of attorney's fees to the City and
remand the issue of attorney's fees to the trial court for further consideration.