Generic filters
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Search in excerpt

Nevada Today

Nevada Today is a nonpartisan, independently owned and operated site dedicated to providing up-to-date news and smart analysis on the issues that impact Nevada's communities and businesses.

News and informationOn The Water FrontSouthern Nevada Water Authority (SNWA)The EconomyVirgin River Water DistrictVirgin Valley Water Board (VVWB)

Judge Rejects Water Board Attorney’s Claim in Golf Course Case

Virgin Valley Water Board from left to right Kevin Brown, manager Bo Bingham, attorney and Rich Bowler, Board Member at the Virgin Valley Water District Board Meeting: September 2018 Photo by Andrew Davey

Las Vegas, NV. February 2, 2021. This morning Las Vegas District Court Judge Timothy C. Williams rejected a plea by Virgin Valley Water District (VVWD) Attorney Jedediah (Bo) Bingham to consider effluent as a civil case issue.

In the two ½-year old civil cases (No. A-18-774539-B), Paradise Canyon, the owners of Wolf Creek, seek legal redress from an attempt by the Virgin Valley Water District (VVWD) to raise their river water irrigation rates from $250 per share to $1,246 [i] per share.

To avoid dealing with the rate issue, Bingham attempted to claim, among other things, that the owners of Wolf Creek breached their lease with the VVWD by not using city-owned effluent before using district-provided irrigation water.

The Attorneys for Paradise Canyon LLC (PC) asked the Court to issue a summary judgment that their client did not breach the terms and conditions of their lease with VVWD by not using effluent.  Judge Williams agreed.

Judge Williams pointed out that the lease did require the Golf Course owners to use available effluent water. However, the Judge noted that the “conduct” of Water Board officials ” has resulted in a waiver of such condition. Therefore, the failure to use available recycled or effluent water was an immaterial provision under the lease.”

In reaching its decision, the Judge relied on the following uncontroverted facts:

  • VVWD waived enforcement of the effluent water use provision by renewing the lease for eight consecutive years;
  • VVWD board members’ knowledge in 2011 that although effluent water was available, Wolf Creek wasn’t using it;
  • Estoppel Certificates executed in favor of Wolf Creek’s owners in 2011 and 2012, affirming no default had occurred.

The Judge wrote that since as early as March or June 2011, the VVWD knew of the effluent issue, raising the statute of limitations under NRS 11.190(b).

In light of the Nevada six-year (6) statute of limitations, claims based on breach of contract due to PC’s failure to use available recycled or effluent water are time-barred, Judge Williams reported.

The Judge granted Paradise Canyons’s Motion for Summary Judgment For Declaratory Relief on the effluent water issue.

The Judge will hear other motions for summary judgment filed by attorneys for Paradise Canyon later.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

About Author

Michael McGreer Mesquite, Nevada
Dr. Michael Manford McGreer is managing editor of and writes on issues that impact public policy.

Comments (2)

  1. […] effluent before using river water for irrigation. In that motion, Judge Williams noted that the “conduct” of Water Board officials” resulted in a waiver of such condition. Therefore, the failure to use available recycled or […]

  2. […] using river water for irrigation.  Not quite, says Judge Williams;  the “conduct” of Water Board officials” resulted in a waiver of such condition. Therefore, the failure to use available recycled or […]

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: