CITY OF BLACKWELL v. WOODERSON, 2017 OK CIV APP 33

Background

City of Blackwell (City) holds a senior surface-water permit to draw water from the Chikaskia River for municipal supply; Defendants (farmers) hold junior surface-water permits to irrigate crops from the same river.
City sued alleging Defendants’ irrigation reduced flow at the City’s diversion point, causing pump cavitation and municipal water restrictions; City sought injunctive relief to limit irrigation when USGS gauges read at or below certain levels.
After a temporary injunction hearing, the trial court denied the City’s request for a temporary injunction; the City did not appeal that denial.
The City later moved for leave to amend its petition to drop injunctive relief and instead seek a declaratory judgment under the Oklahoma Uniform Declaratory Judgments Act (DJA) to define when Defendants’ diversions impair the City’s rights; the City filed the motion after Defendants refused consent to amendment.
Defendants opposed amendment (arguing undue delay, futility, relitigation of the injunction hearing, and lack of justiciability) and moved for summary judgment on the original petition; the trial court denied leave to amend and granted summary judgment for Defendants.
The Court of Civil Appeals reversed and remanded, holding the trial court abused its discretion in denying leave to amend based on futility, undue delay, and prejudice, and instructed the City to notify the Oklahoma Water Resources Board (OWRB) upon filing the amended petition.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether trial court erred denying leave to amend to add a declaratory-judgment claim under the DJA	City: amendment is proper; declaratory relief differs from injunctive relief and is permissible even if temporary injunction failed	Defs: amendment is futile and would relitigate issues already resolved at the injunction hearing; no justiciable controversy	Reversed: denial based on futility was error; proposed amendment states a cognizable claim for declaratory relief
Whether the proposed declaratory claim is justiciable/ripe	City: a real, adversarial dispute exists over when Defendants’ diversions impair City’s statutory rights; future recurrence is likely	Defs: City’s allegations are speculative because river currently has sufficient water; request risks advisory opinion	Court: justiciability satisfied for DJA purposes; ripeness requirement met because the dispute is real and likely to recur
Whether denial of leave was warranted by undue delay or prejudice	City: delay was explained (sought consent, needed council action); lapse was not excessive and discovery was ongoing	Defs: continued litigation after injunction loss prejudicial	Court: no abuse of discretion — delay not undue and prejudice not shown; parties would litigate issues that existed from the outset
Whether grant of summary judgment on original petition should be addressed	City: summary judgment premature after denial of leave to amend and absence of consolidation/schedule for discovery	Defs: sought summary judgment based on record	Court: moot as to original injunctive claim if amendment allowed; did not resolve merits of amended declaratory claim

Key Cases Cited

Prough v. Edinger, Inc., 862 P.2d 71 (Okla. 1993) (standards for trial court discretion to deny leave to amend)
Gordon v. Followell, 391 P.2d 242 (Okla. 1964) (requirements for invoking the DJA and justiciability)
Heldermon v. Wright, 152 P.3d 855 (Okla. 2006) (OWRB notice and Attorney General intervention requirements for water-right suits under 82 O.S. §105.5)
Tulsa Indus. Auth. v. City of Tulsa, 270 P.3d 113 (Okla. 2011) (definition of justiciable controversy and prohibition on advisory opinions)
City of Broken Arrow v. Bass Pro Outdoor World, L.L.C., 250 P.3d 305 (Okla. 2011) (justiciability requires more than conclusory allegations)
Lippitt v. Farmers Ins. Exchange, 233 P.3d 799 (Okla. Civ. App. 2010) (temporary injunctive relief requires clear and convincing evidence)
Bittle v. Oklahoma City University, 6 P.3d 509 (Okla. Civ. App. 2000) (futility standard for denying leave to amend parallels failure-to-state-a-claim analysis)
Ladra v. New Dominion, LLC, 353 P.3d 529 (Okla. 2015) (procedural limits for accelerated appeals and review scope)