Swalley Irrigation District v. Alvis

326 F. App'x 995 (9th Cir. 2009) · United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · June 9, 2009 · No. 6:04-CV-01721-AA

Summary

Landowners appealed the district court’s grant of summary judgment to Swalley Irrigation District concerning conversion of an open irrigation canal into a pressurized pipeline. The Ninth Circuit held that the irrigation district’s right of way was not limited to open canals or ditches and that the conversion was permissible because the landowners had not shown an increased burden or diminution in property value. The court affirmed the judgment and noted that the declaratory judgment claim was not moot.

Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Writing for the Court
Fisher; Goodwin; Scannlain
Jurisdiction
Federal
Decision date
June 9, 2009
Docket number
6:04-CV-01721-AA
Procedural posture
Several landowners appealed the district court's grant of summary judgment to Swalley Irrigation District in an easement dispute concerning conversion of an existing open canal into a pressurized pipeline.
Standard of review
Summary judgment is reviewed for whether the record establishes a genuine issue of material fact and whether the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
Precedential value
Nonprecedential unpublished Ninth Circuit memorandum disposition
Parties
Landowners v. Swalley Irrigation District
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

easementsreal estatesummary judgmentdeclaratory judgmentmootness

Practice areas

Real estate lawEasements and servitudesCivil procedureAppellate procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether Swalley's irrigation right of way permitted conversion of an existing open canal into a pressurized pipeline.
  2. Whether the proposed pipeline conversion would impermissibly increase the burden on the landowners' property.
  3. Whether Swalley's request for declaratory relief was moot because the pipeline might have been installed before appellate submission.

Holdings

  1. The irrigation right of way was not limited to the construction or maintenance of open canals or ditches and could encompass conversion of the existing canal into a pressurized pipeline.
  2. Conversion of the canal into a pressurized pipeline was permissible because the landowners failed to establish that it would increase the burden on their property.
  3. The declaratory-judgment request was not moot merely because the pipeline might have been installed by the time the case was submitted.

Key quotations

Accordingly, the conversion of the existing canal into a pressurized pipeline is permissible so long as it does not increase the burden on the landowners’ property. (997)
Removal of any aesthetic benefits provided by the open canal merely eliminates an incidental benefit provided by Swalley’s use of the easement; such action does not place an additional burden on the landowners’ property. (997)
There is still an "occasion for meaningful relief” insofar as affirmance of the district court's judgment shields Swalley from any future claims for relief. (997)

Factual background

Swalley Irrigation District held an existing right of way over landowners' property for an irrigation canal. Swalley proposed converting the open canal into a pressurized pipeline located within the existing right of way. The landowners did not present evidence that the conversion would devalue their property, although removal of the open canal could eliminate aesthetic benefits.

Procedural history

The United States District Court for the District of Oregon granted summary judgment to Swalley Irrigation District. The landowners appealed. The Ninth Circuit affirmed, concluding that the applicable irrigation right of way was not limited to open canals or ditches, that the proposed pipeline conversion was permissible absent an increased burden on the servient land, and that the declaratory-judgment request was not moot.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…