IN EQUITY C-125-B: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA V. WALKER RIVER IRRIGATION, ET AL.

Filing 2702

ORDER granting ECF No. 2701 Stipulation. The Scheduling Order and obligations outlined therein should be stayed for 90 days to give the Parties the opportunity to resolve the Tribes outstanding water right claims by agreement (9/22/2022). W ithin seven (7) days before the expiration of any stay granted the Parties will inform the Court either that additional time is needed to achieve a settlement agreement or that settlement will not be possible. In either case, the Parties will seek additional relief from the Court accordingly as needed and as contemplated by paragraphs 14 and 16 of the Scheduling Order. Signed by Magistrate Judge Craig S. Denney on 6/24/2022. (Case stayed.) (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - CJD) (Walker River Water Case Display Page)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

GORDON H. DEPAOLI,
Nevada State Bar No. 00195
DALE E. FERGUSON
Nevada State Bar No. 04986
DOMENICO R. DePAOLI
Nevada State Bar No. 11553
WOODBURN AND WEDGE
6100 Neil Road, Suite 500
Reno, Nevada 89511
Telephone: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Attorneys for Walker River Irrigation District

9
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEVADA

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
WALKER RIVER PAIUTE TRIBE,
)
)
Plaintiff-Intervenor,
)
)
v.
)
)
WALKER RIVER IRRIGATION DISTRICT, )
a corporation, et al.,
)
)
Defendants.
)
)

3:73-cv-00127-MMD-CSD

STIPULATION AND ORDER
STAYING THE ORDER
REGARDING DISCOVERY AND
MOTION SCHEDULE

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

1.

On March 16, 2020, the Court entered the Order Regarding Discovery and Motion

Schedule and Procedure (the “Scheduling Order”). ECF No. 2611. The Scheduling Order was
amended by stipulation on December 28, 2020 due to circumstances related to the COVID-19
Pandemic. See ECF No. 2648. The Scheduling Order was amended again by stipulation on
September 15, 2021 due to the same ongoing Pandemic-related circumstances. See ECF No. 2676.
As amended, the existing schedule by which the parties are engaged in litigation activities is
ongoing with some deadlines established and imminent and some deadlines still indefinite.
1

1

2.

The Scheduling Order contemplates at paragraphs 14 and 16 that the Plaintiffs and

2

Principal Defendants (the “Parties”) may ask the Court for relief from the deadlines and

3

obligations contemplated under the Scheduling Order.

4
5
6

3.

The Parties believe that current, unique circumstances exist that justify a 90-day

stay of the deadlines and obligations contemplated under the Scheduling Order.
4.

Beginning in late 2021, undersigned counsel for the Walker River Irrigation

7

District, (the “District”), the United States and the Walker River Paiute Tribe have actively

8

engaged in substantive discussions centered on resolving the outstanding water right claims of the

9

Walker River Paiute Tribe (the “Tribe”) by settlement and agreement among them.

10

5.

In order to confirm that resolution of the Tribe’s outstanding water right claims

11

might be possible, the District, the United States and the Tribe have engaged in discussions

12

concerning the parameters of a possible settlement with their decision-makers.

13

6.

In addition to discussions with its decision-makers, counsel for the District engaged

14

in discussions concerning the parameters of a possible settlement with representatives of the

15

Nevada Division of Water Resources and the Nevada Department of Wildlife and those

16

representatives have also held internal discussions on the parameters of a possible settlement.

17

7.

Those meetings and discussions have resulted in the development of a

18

comprehensive list of principles that would both resolve the Tribe’s water right claims and the

19

challenges to those claims.

20

8.

Undersigned counsel for the United States, Tribe, District and Nevada Department

21

of Wildlife met most recently on June 16, 2022 and have agreed (among counsel and in principle)

22

to the broader parameters of settlement and agreement that could likely be the basis for resolving

23

the Tribe’s outstanding water right claims. Undersigned counsel have agreed to further develop

24

these principles into a final settlement and agreement that they will present to their respective

25

clients/government superiors for approval.

26
27

9.

The Parties believe that after many years of active litigation, resolution of the

Tribe’s outstanding water right claims is real and possible. With one limited exception, the Parties

28
2

1

believe, rather than engaging in active, expensive litigation activities, that their collective efforts

2

and resources are better spent at this time focused exclusively on accomplishing resolution of the

3

Tribe’s outstanding water right claims through settlement and agreement. The limited exception

4

relates to the continuation of the work of the District’s Historical expert which work has been

5

delayed by closure and/or limited access to Archive/Records Offices. Rather than stopping that

6

work now, and then requiring it to start again, if the settlement efforts are ultimately unsuccessful,

7

the District believes that it will be more efficient to continue that work while these settlement

8

discussions continue, at least during the initial 90 day stay period described below. This exception

9

can be reviewed at that time.

10

10.

For these reasons, the Parties jointly request that the Court stay the remaining

11

deadlines of its Scheduling Order for 90 days. During that time, the Parties will work to draft

12

necessary documents and secure necessary settlement approval. Within seven (7) days before the

13

expiration of the stay, the Parties will either: a) inform the Court that documents supporting a

14

settlement will be presented to the Court within the 90-day stay period; b) seek an extension to the

15

stay and detail the remaining tasks needed to secure settlement approval; or c) inform the Court

16

that efforts to resolve the Tribe’s outstanding water right claims by settlement have failed. In the

17

event settlement fails, the Parties will present a joint schedule that resumes the schedule already

18

developed to litigate this matter to conclusion as needed.

19

11.

The Parties to this action include the federal government, the Walker River Paiute

20

Tribe, Nevada and California entities, and a very large irrigation district. Securing final party

21

approval for these entities to enter into any settlement will require extensive internal consultation

22

and the approval of numerous individuals. Though this process will likely take some time to

23

complete, undersigned counsel will make every effort to advance this effort as quickly as possible

24

and believe that the 90-day stay being sought herein will be sufficient to advance this matter

25

toward a final resolution. Moving forward, unless otherwise ordered by the Court, the Parties will

26

seek only 90-day stays, as needed, to accomplish settlement. The Parties are, therefore, seeking a

27
28
3

1

90-day stay of the deadlines and obligations contemplated under the Scheduling Order in good

2

faith and not for any dilatory purpose.

3
4

NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to paragraphs 14 and 16 of the Scheduling Order,
the parties hereby stipulate and agree as follows:

5

1.

The Scheduling Order and obligations outlined therein should be stayed for 90 days

6

to give the Parties the opportunity to resolve the Tribe’s outstanding water right claims by

7

agreement.

8

2.

Within seven (7) days before the expiration of any stay granted the Parties will

9

inform the Court either that additional time is needed to achieve a settlement agreement or that

10

settlement will not be possible. In either case, the Parties will seek additional relief from the Court

11

accordingly as needed and as contemplated by paragraphs 14 and 16 of the Scheduling Order.

12
13
14
15
16
17
18

Dated: June 23, 2022.
WOODBURN AND WEDGE

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

By:

/ s / Gordon H. DePaoli
Gordon H. DePaoli
Nevada Bar No. 195
6100 Neil Road, Suite 500
Reno, Nevada 89511
Attorneys for Walker River Irrigation
District

By:

/ s / Guss Guarino
(per authorization)
Guss Guarino, Trial Attorney
Tyler J. Eastman, Trial Attorney
Marisa J. Hazell, Trial Attorney
Environment and Natural Resources Div.
999 18th Street, Suite 370
Denver, Colorado 80202

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

LAW OFFICES OF WES WILLIAMS, JR.,
P.C.

David L. Negri
Trial Attorney, Natural Resources Section
c/o U.S. Attorney’s Office
800 Park Boulevard, Suite 600
Boise, Idaho 83712
Attorneys for United States of America

By:

/ s / Wes Williams, Jr.
(per authorization)
Wes Williams, Jr., NSB 6864
3119 Lake Pasture Rd.
P.O. Box 100
Schurz, Nevada 89427
MEYER, WALKER & WALKER, P.C.

BEST BEST & KRIEGER

By:

By:

/ s / Alice E. Walker
(per authorization)
Alice E. Walker
4

/ s / Roderick E. Walston
(per authorization)
Roderick E. Walston

1
2

1007 Pearl Street, Suite 220
Boulder, Colorado 80302
Attorneys for Walker River Paiute Tribe

2001 N. Main Street, Suite 390
Walnut Creek, California 94596
Attorney for Centennial Livestock and Lyon
County

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
OF CALIFORNIA

Jerry Snyder, NSB 6830
429 W. Plumb Lane
Reno, Nevada 89509
Attorney for Lyon County

3
4
5
6
7
8
9

By:

/ s / Nhu Q. Nguyen
(per authorization)
Nhu Q. Nguyen, NSB 7844
1300 I Street, Suite 125
P.O. Box 944255
Sacramento, California 94244-2550
Attorneys for California State Agencies

THE COUNTY OF MONO (CA)

By:

/ s / Stacey Simon
(per authorization)
Stacey Simon, County Counsel
Emily Fox, Dep. County Counsel
P.O. Box 2415A
Mammoth Lakes, California 93546-2415
Attorneys for Mono County

10
11
12

STATE OF NEVADA OFFICE OF THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL

13

By:

14
15
16

/ s / Anthony J. Walsh
(per authorization)
Anthony J. Walsh, NSB 14128
Deputy Attorney General
100 N. Carson Street
Carson City, Nevada 89701-4717
Attorneys for Nevada Department of Wildlife

SIMONS HALL JOHNSTON PC
By:

/ s / Brad M. Johnston
(per authorization)
Brad M. Johnston, NSB 8515
22 State Route 208
Yerington, Nevada 89447
Attorneys for Desert Pearl Farms, Peri
Family Ranch, LLC, Peri & Peri LLC, and
Frade Ranches

17
18
19
20

ORDER
21
22
23
24

June 24
Dated: _____________,
2022.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

_______________________________
United States Magistrate Judge

25
26
27
28
5