Case 6:66-cv MV-WPL Document Filed 05/07/14 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO

Transcription

1 Case 6:66-cv MV-WPL Document Filed 05/07/14 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO STATE OF NEW MEXICO, ex rel. STATE ENGINEER, Plaintiff, v. R. LEE AAMODT, et al., No. 66cv6639 MV/WPL Defendants, and UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PUEBLO DE NAMBÉ, PUEBLO DE POJOAQUE, PUEBLO DE SAN ILDEFONSO, and PUEBLO DE TESUQUE, Plaintiffs-in-Intervention. [PROPOSED] CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER This case is before the Court to determine whether the Court should approve the Settlement Agreement (Apr. 19, 2012 ( Settlement Agreement and enter the proposed Partial Final Judgment and Decree and the Interim Administrative Order (collectively Partial Final Decree. The Partial Final Decree is intended to resolve issues related to the determination and administration of the water rights of the Pueblo de Nambé, the Pueblo de Pojoaque, the Pueblo de Tesuque, and the Pueblo de San Ildefonso (collectively Pueblos in the Pojoaque Basin in New Mexico. The Settlement Agreement was executed by the Pueblos, the United States, the State of New Mexico, the County of Santa Fe, and the City of Santa Fe. Certification to the Court of Attachment A United States Proposed Case Management Order Page 1 of 9

2 Case 6:66-cv MV-WPL Document Filed 05/07/14 Page 2 of 9 Completion of Modifications to the Aamodt Settlement Agreement (Oct. 2, 2013 (Doc The Claims Resolution Act of 2010, Pub. L. No , , 124 Stat. 3064, ( Settlement Act, authorized the United States to execute the Settlement Agreement as modified by the legislation and to carry out the federal obligations under its terms in order to resolve the Pueblos water rights. The entities which executed the Settlement Agreement ( Settlement Parties have asked the Court to enter the Partial Final Decree after approving the Settlement Agreement. The sole issue before the Court is whether to enter the Partial Final Decree and approve the Settlement Agreement. Although the Court may determine not to enter the Partial Final Decree, the Court has no authority to modify the terms of the Settlement Agreement as approved in the Settlement Act or to enter a partial final judgment and decree that is not fully consistent with that legislation. On December 18, 2007, this Court ordered that consideration of the Settlement Agreement and entry of the Partial Final Decree concerning the water rights of the Pueblos should proceed by an order to show cause proceeding. Order Granting Motion of Settlement Parties to Establish Procedures for (1 Approval of Settlement Agreement, (2 Entry of a Partial Final Decree, (3 Entry of Interim Administrative Order, and (4 Entry of a Final Decree (Dec. 18, 2007 (Doc ( Procedural Order. That Order, as amended, governs these proceedings. See Amended Order Establishing Procedures for (1 Approval of Settlement Agreement, (2 Entry of a Partial Final Decree, and (3 Entry of Interim Administrative Order (Feb. 9, 2011 (Doc. 7310; Second Amended Procedural Order Regarding Approval of Settlement Agreement (Nov. 4, 2013 (Doc On December 6, 2013, the Court issued its Order To Show Cause and Notice of Proceeding Attachment A United States Proposed Case Management Order Page 2 of 9

3 Case 6:66-cv MV-WPL Document Filed 05/07/14 Page 3 of 9 to Approve Settlement Agreement and Enter Proposed Partial Final Judgment and Decree on the Water Rights of the Pueblos of Tesuque, Pojoaque, Nambe and San Ildefonso (Dec. 6, 2013 (Doc ( Order to Show Cause. Subsequently, water rights holders throughout the Pojoaque Basin were notified via U.S. Mail, publication, and numerous public meetings of the Order to Show Cause. The Order to Show Cause required all objections to the Settlement Agreement and entry of the proposed Partial Final Decree be filed by April 7, As previously directed by this Court in the Procedural Order, the United States and Pueblos have presented their proposed Case Management Order (filed May 7, Having considered the proposal, the Court has determined that a Case Management Order as proposed by the United States and Pueblos should be entered. I. PARTIES TO THIS ORDER TO THIS SHOW CAUSE PROCEEDING A. PARTIES WHO HAVE ACCEPTED THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. Upon examination of the Clerk of Court s Docket, the Court hereby finds that approximately individuals or entities have responded to the Order to Show Cause and have completed and filed the form titled Acceptances of Settlement Agreement and Notice of Domestic Well Election. For purposes of this Order, these parties accepting the Settlement Agreement shall be referred to as Accepting Parties. B. PARTIES OBJECTING TO THE SETTLEMENT AND ENTRY OF THE PARTIAL FINAL DECREE. Upon examination of the Clerk of Court s Docket, the Court hereby finds that approximately individuals or entities have responded to the Order to Show Cause and have completed and timely filed the form titled Objection to Settlement Agreement and Proposed Partial Final Judgment and Decree on the Water Rights of the Pueblos of Tesuque, Attachment A United States Proposed Case Management Order Page 3 of 9

4 Case 6:66-cv MV-WPL Document Filed 05/07/14 Page 4 of 9 Pojoaque, Nambé and San Ildefonso, and Interim Administrative Order. For purposes of this Case Management Order, these parties shall be referred to as Objectors. C. WITHDRAWAL. At any time, an Objector may request to withdraw from this proceeding by filing a Request to Withdraw Objection. D. REPRESENTATION. All Objectors and Accepting Parties are cautioned that they cannot represent any person other than themselves. Pursuant to D.N.M.LR-Civ. 83.7, entities other than a natural person must be represented by an attorney in this Court. Accordingly, the Court finds that each Objector and Accepting Party who is a legal or artificial entity (e.g., corporation, partnership, trust, etc. must be represented by counsel to participate in this proceeding after the entry of this Order. E. CONDUCT OF THE CASE. All parties participating in this Order to Show Cause proceeding will be expected to comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Local Rules of the United States District Court for the District of New Mexico, and all orders entered by this Court. II. ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE PROCEEDING SERVICE, PLAN, AND SCHEDULE A. SERVICE OF FILED DOCUMENTS. This Order to Show Cause Proceeding will involve numerous and voluminous filed documents with the Court. Every filing with the Court must be served on every other party to these proceedings. This requirement applies to all parties whether or not represented by counsel. The Court is concerned that the cost of requiring every party to serve every filed document by mail on numerous unrepresented parties will unfairly impede the participation of all parties to this Attachment A United States Proposed Case Management Order Page 4 of 9

5 Case 6:66-cv MV-WPL Document Filed 05/07/14 Page 5 of 9 matter. The Court finds that, as provided by Paragraph (3 of this Court s CM/ECF Administrative Procedures Manual, all parties represented by counsel of record and all unrepresented Accepting Parties and Objectors who have registered an address with the Court s CM/ECF system, will be electronically served with all electronically filed documents via the CM/ECF system. The Court finds further that many pro se Accepting Parties and Objectors have not registered an address with the Court. A copy of this Case Management Order shall be served by the Court on all pro se unrepresented Accepting Parties and Objectors not registered with the CM/ECF system by first class mail. All unrepresented Accepting Parties and Objectors not currently registered with the Court s CM/ECF system are ordered to register an address with the Court s CM/ECF system information and forms about how to register with the CM/ECF system can be found at the Court s Internet website - Pro se parties may access the forms to register with the CM/ECF system by visiting the Court s website at (under the heading CM/ECF. Only those pro se parties who request this Court for relief from this requirement by submitting the form attached to this Order will be exempted from this registration requirement. The Court shall maintain the list of names and addresses that parties must serve by mail and shall update the list at the end of each month that a change occurs giving notice to all parties via the CM/ECF system and/or mail. Any party who does not maintain a current mailing address and whose mail is returned to the Court shall be removed from the service list without further notice. Attachment A United States Proposed Case Management Order Page 5 of 9

6 Case 6:66-cv MV-WPL Document Filed 05/07/14 Page 6 of 9 After this Case Management Order is issued, every party may rely upon the CM/ECF system and the mail service list provided by the Court for service of documents on other parties. Every party who does not register with the CM/ECF system is reminded that they too must nevertheless serve any pleading or other correspondence with the Court on all other parties on the Court s mail service list by first-class mail. Any pleading or correspondence that is not properly served on all parties will not be considered by the Court. B. FURTHER PROCEEDINGS ON OBJECTIONS PRESENTED INITIAL DISPOSITIVE BRIEFING Within ninety (90 days of the entry of this Order, the Settlement Parties and any Accepting Parties who choose to do so, shall file memoranda in support of their position that the Court should approve the Settlement Agreement and enter the Partial Final Decree at this time. In the memoranda, the Parties shall address each and every of the filed objections by category and state why any such category of objections should be overruled or dismissed at this time. In lieu of the limitation provided by D.N.M.LR-Civ. 7.5, each memorandum must not exceed seventy-five (75 double-spaced pages. The Settlement Parties and the Accepting Parties are urged to consult among themselves and, where possible, avoid duplication of arguments and attachments; legal positions must be supported by legal authority; factual positions must be supported by materials which demonstrate that there are no disputed material facts at issue. Within one hundred and twenty (120 sixty days of the entry of this Order (i.e. sixty (60 days from the likely filing of the Settlement Parties memoranda, Objectors shall respond. Objectors should describe the specific harm that they will suffer by entry of the proposed Partial Final Decree and address with specificity why approval of the Settlement Agreement and entry of the Partial Final Decree is not fair, adequate, reasonable, is not in the public interest, or is not Attachment A United States Proposed Case Management Order Page 6 of 9

7 Case 6:66-cv MV-WPL Document Filed 05/07/14 Page 7 of 9 consistent with applicable law. See Procedural Order at 4. Objectors should also describe with specificity which of the Settlement Parties allegations are disputed. Further, the Objectors must state why their objections should be sustained or, in the alternative, why their objections should not be overruled at this time. As with the opening briefs, legal positions must be supported by legal authority. Factual positions must be supported by materials which demonstrate either that (1 the factual position at issue is not disputed or (2 further proceedings are required to address relevant factual matters. If any Objector asserts that additional procedures are required before the Court addresses his/her objections, the Objector shall set forth those procedures and the reasons that the procedures are required. In lieu of the limitation provided by D.N.M.LR-Civ. 7.5, each Objector s response must not exceed seventy-five (75 double-spaced pages. The Objectors are urged to consult among themselves and, where possible, avoid duplication of arguments and attachments. An Objector s failure to timely file a response brief will constitute waiver of his/her objection. Within one hundred and fifty (150 days from the entry of this Order (i.e. 30 days from the likely response date of the last response memorandum, the Settlement Parties, and any Accepting Parties who choose to do so, shall file replies to the responses filed. In lieu of the limitation provided by D.N.M.LR-Civ. 7.5, each reply must not exceed thirty (30 double-spaced pages. Again, consolidation of replies is encouraged. For the purposes of this initial briefing, discovery is not warranted. However, consistent with D.N.M.LR-Civ. 7.3(b, Settlement Parties, Accepting Parties, and Objectors may present additional evidence in support of any necessary allegation of undisputed material fact, in the form of affidavits, deposition excerpts or other documents. D.N.M.LR-Civ. 10.5, which limits exhibits Attachment A United States Proposed Case Management Order Page 7 of 9

8 Case 6:66-cv MV-WPL Document Filed 05/07/14 Page 8 of 9 to a total of fifty (50 pages, is hereby waived, although parties are strongly encouraged to curate carefully their exhibits. The submission of copies of cases, voluminous treatises, extensive legislation and the like is not necessary and is strongly discouraged for this briefing. Once briefing concludes, the matter will be taken up by the District Court Judge who shall take the matters under advisement and determine whether it is prepared to rule on the validity of the objections. If additional proceedings are required, the Court will direct the affected parties to develop a supplemental case management order to establish further procedures to address any remaining issues. C. LOCAL RULE WAIVER. Rule 7 of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure provides in part [m]ovants must determine whether a motion is opposed, and a motion that omits recitation of a good-faith request for concurrence may be summarily denied. Taking into account the number of parties to this proceeding, the Court finds that complying with this provision would result in large expenditures of time and effort without significant benefit to this case. Accordingly, this provision shall be waived for these proceedings except when a party seeks an extension of time to file a pleading or to take some other required action. In that case, all parties who have registered an address with the Court s CM/ECF system must be consulted. If all parties agree to the extension, the party seeking the extension of time needs only to file and serve a notice of the agreed-upon extension. IT IS SO ORDERED THIS DAY OF, William P. Lynch U.S. Magistrate Judge Attachment A United States Proposed Case Management Order Page 8 of 9

9 Case 6:66-cv MV-WPL Document Filed 05/07/14 Page 9 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO STATE OF NEW MEXICO, ex rel. STATE ENGINEER, Plaintiff, v. R. LEE AAMODT, et al., No. 66cv6639 MV/WPL Defendants, and UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PUEBLO DE NAMBÉ, PUEBLO DE POJOAQUE, PUEBLO DE SAN ILDEFONSO, and PUEBLO DE TESUQUE, Plaintiffs-in-Intervention. NOTICE OF INTENT TO RECIEVE SERVICE OF GENERAL PLEADINGS I,, Print Name, Mailing Address, Mailing Address, address am a pro se Defendant in the proceeding associated Settlement Agreement (Apr. 19, 2012 and entry of the proposed Partial Final Judgment and Decree and the Interim Administrative Order and wish to receive service of pleadings by mail. I understand that if I file any documents in this proceeding I will have to serve by mail every other party that requests to be served by mail. Date Signature Return to U.S. Magistrate Judge Lynch, U.S. District Court, 106 South Federal Place, Santa Fe NM Attachment A United States Proposed Case Management Order Page 9 of 9