Sec. Litig., 138 F. Supp. 2d 624, 640 (E.D. Pa. 2001).7)Colorado v. New Mexico, 467 U.S. 310, 316 (1984).8)Burks v. Lasker, 441 U.S. 471, 484 (1979) (internal quotation marks omitted).
Typically, disputes over water rights in interstate waters are resolved by the US Supreme Court under its original jurisdiction, in which the Court applies its own common law doctrine of "equitable apportionment." Colorado v. New Mexico, 467 U.S. 310, 323-324 (1984); Nebraska v. Wyoming, 325 U.S. 589, 617 (1945). The Nevada district court in the Walker River case, however, acquired jurisdiction over water rights in both Nevada and California in the original Walker River litigation, and thus the court, in addressing Mineral County’s public trust claim, might face a choice of law issue that does not normally arise when the US Supreme Court resolves disputes concerning interstate waters under its original jurisdiction.