Hinderlider v. La Plata River & Cherry Creek Ditch Co., 304 U.S. 92 (1938), is a US Supreme Court case that said a "general common law" or "general federal common law" no longer exists in the American legal system and is unconstitutional. However, federal courts retain the power to create federal common law in specific areas related to federal rights and interests.[1]
| Hinderlider v. La Plata River & Cherry Creek Ditch Co. | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Argued January 31, 1938 Decided April 25, 1938 | |
| Full case name | Hinderlider v. La Plata River & Cherry Creek Ditch Co. |
| Citations | 304 U.S. 92 (more) 58 S. Ct. 803; 82 L. Ed. 1202 |
| Case history | |
| Prior | 101 Colo. 73, 70 P.2d 849 (1937) |
| Holding | |
| Federal common law applies to resolve water rights governed by an interstate compact. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinion | |
| Majority | Brandeis |
| Cardozo took no part in the consideration or decision of the case. | |
Facts edit
This dispute revolved around diverting water from the La Plata River, a tributary to the Colorado River.
This section needs expansion. You can help by adding to it. (December 2014) |
Judgment edit
This section needs expansion. You can help by adding to it. (December 2014) |
Significance edit
An archetypical example of such federal common law is that relating to disputes between states of the United States. Hinderlider was the first case to reaffirm the existence of federal common law for other purposes, specifically here, the interpretation of an interstate compact governing water rights between states.[2]
See also edit
References edit
External links edit
Works related to Hinderlider v. La Plata River & Cherry Creek Ditch Co. at Wikisource- Text of Hinderlider v. La Plata River & Cherry Creek Ditch Co., 304 U.S. 92 (1938) is available from: Justia Library of Congress
