- 25 -
In other words, petitioners posit that the origin of the claim
involved their farm venture and not the acquisition or
disposition of a capital asset (i.e., property rights).
Respondent argues that the fundamental issue in the lawsuits
involved property rights. In support of that proposition,
respondent asserts that petitioners did not claim a loss of farm
income in their lawsuit against Dell'Oca.
The record reflects that petitioners initially sought
damages in the form of "loss of agricultural income and damage to
their livestock, wildlife, fish, and recreational use". In other
words, petitioners asserted a loss of farm-related income due to
Dell'Oca's alleged overconsumption of the reservoir water.
However, petitioners submitted a second complaint which
enumerated, among other things, three causes of action in
connection with property rights: (1) A cause of action to quiet
title to interest in water; (2) a cause of action to quiet title
to interest in land; (3) a cause of action for declaratory relief
regarding interest in land (prescriptive easement). Moreover,
the State court allocated and apportioned the riparian rights on
the basis of the parties' respective real property interests.
Hence, petitioners obtained a judgment which allowed them to
enjoy and utilize a significant portion of the water in the
reservoir, thereby enhancing the real property. Accordingly, we
find that the origin of the claim in the Dell'Oca lawsuit was the
Page: Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011