Lawrence v. Clark County
127 Nev. 390, 127 Nev. Adv. Rep. 32, 254 P.3d 606 (2011)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
The State of Nevada holds title to lands that were submerged beneath navigable waterways at the time of statehood in trust for the public. Any legislative conveyance of such public trust land is subject to judicial review to determine if the land's trust status has been extinguished and whether the transfer comports with the state's duties as a trustee.
Facts:
- The Nevada Legislature enacted the Fort Mohave Valley Development Law (FMVDL), which was later amended to require the Colorado River Commission (CRC) to transfer its land holdings in the Fort Mohave Valley to Clark County.
- In accordance with the law, the Nevada State Land Registrar, James R. Lawrence, began transferring the land to Clark County.
- Lawrence withheld approximately 330 acres of land adjacent to the Colorado River from the transfer.
- Lawrence believed this specific parcel was formerly submerged land and was therefore held by the state under the public trust doctrine, making it non-transferable without further consideration.
Procedural Posture:
- Clark County filed a complaint for declaratory relief against State Land Registrar James R. Lawrence in a Nevada district court, seeking an order compelling the transfer of the disputed land.
- Lawrence filed a counterclaim for declaratory relief, asking the court to declare the land non-transferable under the public trust doctrine.
- Clark County moved for judgment on the pleadings.
- The district court granted Clark County's motion, finding the public trust doctrine did not apply because the land was no longer in the river's channel, and ordered Lawrence to transfer the land.
- Lawrence, the appellant, appealed the district court’s judgment to the Supreme Court of Nevada, where Clark County was the respondent.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Is a legislatively mandated transfer of formerly submerged state land subject to the public trust doctrine, requiring judicial review of the land's history and the public's interest in the transfer?
Opinions:
Majority - Saitta, J.
Yes. A legislatively mandated transfer of formerly submerged land is subject to the public trust doctrine, and the validity of such a transfer requires factual determinations about the land's history and whether the conveyance serves the public interest. The court formally adopts the public trust doctrine in Nevada, grounding its existence in prior caselaw, the state constitution's 'gift clause,' state statutes regarding public lands and water, and the inherent limitations on state sovereignty articulated in Illinois Central Railroad v. Illinois. To determine if the doctrine applies, a court must first ascertain if the land was beneath a navigable waterway at the time of Nevada's statehood (1864). If the land is now dry, the court must then determine if this occurred through avulsion (a sudden change, which preserves the trust) or reliction (a gradual change, which extinguishes the trust). If the land is found to be trust property, the transfer is only permissible if it serves the public interest. Because these crucial questions of fact were unresolved, the lower court's judgment was improper, and the case must be remanded for these determinations.
Analysis:
This decision formally establishes the public trust doctrine as binding law in Nevada, creating a significant framework for judicial review over legislative and executive actions concerning public lands and waters. By grounding the doctrine in the state constitution and statutes, the court ensures it cannot be easily abrogated by legislation. This ruling will have a substantial impact on future disputes over land development, water rights, and environmental conservation, particularly for property adjacent to historical or current waterways, by subjecting state conveyances to a rigorous, multi-factor test to protect the public's long-term interest.
