California’s Colorado River Water Users Do Not Have Traditional Water Rights

Farmer Michael Abatti v. Imperial Irrigation District is a landmark decision by the California Court of Appeals concerning the millions of acre-feet of Colorado River water used annually to meet the needs of Southern California’s agricultural empire.

Imperial County Farmer Michael Abatti Looks to Take Fight with IID to U.S. Supreme Court

Having been turned away by the California Supreme Court last week, farmer Michael Abatti looked to have lost his years-long fight with the Imperial Irrigation District over who owns valuable water rights on the Colorado River. But Abatti apparently isn’t ready to throw in the towel just yet.

In paperwork filed in a state appellate court Monday, Abatti’s legal team indicated that they wanted to petition the U.S. Supreme Court to take up the matter.

California Supreme Court Refuses to Review Farmer Michael Abatti’s Case Against IID

The tumultuous, years-long legal fight between farmer Michael Abatti and the Imperial Irrigation District — two of Southern California’s powerbrokers — is now finished.

On Wednesday, the California Supreme Court declined Abatti’s petition for review, leaving in place an appellate court’s decision that declared IID the rightful owner of a massive allotment of Colorado River water.

IID Files Opposition in California Supreme Court Battle With Farmer Michael Abatti

The years-long fight between the Imperial Irrigation District and farmer Michael Abatti over control of Colorado River water could be nearing its grand finale in the California Supreme Court. After Abatti requested last month that the state’s highest judicial body take up his case, the water district filed its opposition on Monday.

IID Due to Respond to Abatti Petition

Imperial Irrigation District will file its response today to local farmer Michael Abatti’s petition to the state Supreme Court to review an appellate court decision that overturned the majority of a 2017 ruling in his ongoing legal dispute with the district over water rights.

Comments on Imperial Valley Water

The recent decision regarding Michael Abatti’s appeal of the IID 2013 EDP confirms some most disturbing trends.

My experience has been to closely follow four water battles over the years and watch the courts. In the courts were three, Jordan vs Santa Barbara et al., Morgan QSA, and Abatti vs IID. What shines out is the bias of the courts for the government entities. If you think about the crazy positions of Democratic leadership in California, their long control of the legislative process, and the people they put into the courts — it’s no surprise. I was co-chairman of a water transfer battle in the 1980s in Arizona, that’s a story in itself.

IID Facing Another Likely Suit from Another Abatti

While one Abatti brother reportedly plans to take his long-standing quarrel with Imperial Irrigation District over water rights to the California Supreme Court, another one has prepared a claim against the district for revenue he said his business lost through reduced payouts in its water conservation program.

Tuesday’s IID Board of Directors meeting agenda includes a memorandum from its human resources department regarding a financial damages claim against the district by El Centro farmer Jimmy Abatti’s Madjac Farms Inc.

Imperial Irrigation District Scores Another Win In Court Battle With Farmer Michael Abatti

A California appellate court on Wednesday denied Imperial Valley farmer Michael Abatti’s request for a rehearing in his long-running legal fight with the Imperial Irrigation District over control of Colorado River water. The decision could likely spell the end to his legal challenges.

IID and Farmer Michael Abatti Square Off Over the Imperial Valley’s Water

Water is power in California’s Imperial Valley, and a years-long fight over allocations from the Colorado River to the agriculture-heavy region landed back in court on Friday. Attorneys representing local farmers and the Imperial Irrigation District squared off in front of a three-judge panel at the state appellate court level over a water-rights lawsuit expected to be decided in 90 days.