Scott Ranch, LLC
2017 MT 230
| Mont. | 2017Background
- Scott Ranch, LLC (non-Indian) bought former Crow Tribe allotment lands in 2010 and 2012; those lands had been held in trust for allottee Thor Lande until converted to fee in 2006.
- Scott Ranch filed a 2016 petition in Montana Water Court seeking adjudication of 47 water-right claims appurtenant to those lands, asserting Walton-type rights (non-Indian successor rights to share in reserved tribal waters).
- Scott Ranch argued its rights were not subject to the state filing deadline because they remained tied to Indian-trust status until 2006; it disclaimed applicability of the exempt-claim filing process for most claims but later acknowledged two claims were non-exempt.
- The Water Court denied the petition, concluding Scott Ranch’s rights were part of the Tribal Water Right established by the Crow Compact and thus did not require separate state adjudication.
- The Montana Supreme Court reversed, holding Scott Ranch holds Walton rights "recognized under state law" and that the Water Court lacked jurisdiction to adjudicate non-exempt existing rights filed after the July 1, 1996 deadline. The case was remanded with instructions to dismiss the petition without prejudice so Scott Ranch may file exempt claims under the 2017 statutory revision.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Water Court had jurisdiction to adjudicate Scott Ranch’s claims | Scott Ranch: Walton rights arose when lands converted to fee; claims are existing and should be adjudicated by Water Court now | Water Court / amici: Rights remained part of Tribal Water Right via Crow Compact; not separate state claims | The Water Court lacked jurisdiction to hear Scott Ranch’s non-exempt claims filed after July 1, 1996; Scott Ranch’s Walton rights are recognized under state law and not part of the Tribal Water Right under the Compact |
| Whether Walton rights conveyed to a nonmember are part of the Tribal Water Right | Scott Ranch: No; successor’s Walton rights are separate and subject to state law adjudication | Water Court: Allottee rights were part of Tribal Water Right; successor shares in Tribal Water Right only | Walton rights (successor shares) exist as appurtenances to conveyed land and are recognized under state law when land is not held in trust |
| Whether Scott Ranch could use the exempt-claim process or had to comply with the 1996 filing deadline | Scott Ranch: exempt claims process did not apply to its rights; requested general adjudication | State: Exempt claims have specific filing process; non-exempt claims were barred after 1996 | Because Scott Ranch disavowed the exempt process and sought general adjudication, non-exempt claims are time-barred; exempt claims must follow statutory process and deadlines |
| Remedy for late-filed petition | Scott Ranch: requested adjudication now given unique facts | State / amici: Court lacks jurisdiction; petition should be dismissed | Court reversed Water Court and remanded to dismiss petition without prejudice so Scott Ranch may file exempt claims under 2017 law before 2019 deadline |
Key Cases Cited
- Lewis v. Hanson, 227 P.2d 70 (Mont. 1951) (conveyance of allotment land transfers appurtenant water right to grantee)
- Colville Confederated Tribes v. Walton, 647 F.2d 42 (9th Cir. 1981) (non-Indian successor to allotment acquires a right to share in reserved tribal waters)
- United States v. Powers, 305 U.S. 527 (U.S. 1939) (reservation creation date establishes priority for reserved water rights)
- Matter of the Adjudication of Water Rights in the Yellowstone River, 832 P.2d 1210 (Mont. 1992) (statutory filing requirements for existing water rights claims)