The Edwards Aquifer Authority and the State of Texas v. Burrell Day and Joel McDaniel Case Brief

Texas Supreme Court2012Docket #1293086
369 S.W.3d 814 42 Envtl. L. Rep. (Envtl. Law Inst.) 20052 178 Oil & Gas Rep. 817 55 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 343 2012 WL 592729 2012 Tex. LEXIS 161

Complete case briefs with LSD+

Every LSD.Law brief pairs a full IRAC analysis with opinion summaries at three levels of depth, written by a team of Harvard Law and MIT graduates - a quick synopsis when you are pressed for time, the complete reasoning when you need to go deep.

Adaptive Case Views

Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.

Exam-Ready IRAC Format

We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.

Complex Cases, Clarified

We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.

Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis

4 min read

tl;dr: Landowners were denied a permit to pump their desired amount of groundwater based on a state law prioritizing historical use. The Texas Supreme Court held that landowners own the groundwater in place as a property right, and a severe regulatory restriction could constitute a compensable taking.

Legal Significance: This case established for the first time in Texas that a landowner’s interest in the groundwater beneath their property is a constitutionally protected property right, owned in place, similar to oil and gas, and subject to takings claims for excessive government regulation.

The Edwards Aquifer Authority and the State of Texas v. Burrell Day and Joel McDaniel Law School Study Guide

Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.

Case Facts & Court Holding

Key Facts & Case Background

Plaintiffs Burrell Day and Joel McDaniel (“Day”) purchased 381 acres of land overlying the Edwards Aquifer, intending to use groundwater for irrigation. An existing well on the property had been used historically, but primarily by feeding a lake from which water was then pumped for irrigation. The Edwards Aquifer Authority Act (EAAA), a state law passed the year before Day’s purchase, required a permit for groundwater withdrawal, with permit amounts based on beneficial use during a specific historical period (June 1, 1972, to May 31, 1993). Day applied for a permit to withdraw 700 acre-feet of water annually. The Edwards Aquifer Authority (Authority) determined that because the water in the lake was state surface water, only the water used to irrigate seven acres directly from the well constituted a historical beneficial use of groundwater. Consequently, the Authority granted Day a permit for only 14 acre-feet. Day sued, alleging the severe restriction on his ability to use the groundwater beneath his land constituted a regulatory taking of his property without just compensation in violation of the Texas Constitution.

Court Holding & Legal Precedent

Issue: Does a landowner’s interest in the groundwater in place beneath their property constitute a property right that is constitutionally protected from a governmental taking without just compensation?

Yes. The court held that landowners have a constitutionally protected property right Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididu

Read the full analysis

The complete holding, rule, and analysis for this case are available to LSD+ subscribers.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

IRAC Legal Analysis

Premium Feature Unlock

About IRAC analysis

IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the structure professors expect in exam answers. Each LSD.Law brief states the issue, the governing rule with citations, the court's application of that rule, and the conclusion - the same reasoning pattern you will use on exams and in practice.

Legal Issue

Does a landowner’s interest in the groundwater in place beneath their property constitute a property right that is constitutionally protected from a governmental taking without just compensation?

Conclusion

This landmark decision solidifies groundwater in Texas as a privately owned, constitutionally Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi

Legal Rule

A landowner owns the groundwater in place beneath their land as a Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia d

Legal Analysis

The court's analysis centered on establishing the nature of a landowner's interest Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillu

Flash-to-Full Case Opinions

Flash Summary

  • Landowners in Texas own the groundwater in place beneath their land
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt m

Read the full analysis

The complete holding, rule, and analysis for this case are available to LSD+ subscribers.

Start 14-Day Free Trial