Thank You For Submiting Feedback!
Supreme Court of the United States
February 27, 1989, Argued ; May 30, 1989, Decided
[*609] [***710] [**2041] JUSTICE KENNEDY delivered the opinion of the Court, except as to Part II-B-1.
The ultimate question for our decision is whether Arizona's statute governing mineral leases on state lands is void because it does not conform with the federal laws that originally granted those lands from the United States to Arizona. First, however, there is a difficult question about our own jurisdiction, a matter which touches on essential aspects of the proper [****5] relation between state and federal courts.
Various individual taxpayers and the Arizona Education Association, which represents approximately 20,000 public schoolteachers throughout the State, brought suit in Arizona state court, seeking a declaration that the state statute governing mineral leases on state lands, Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 27-234(B) (Supp. 1988), is void, and also seeking appropriate injunctive relief. The state statute was challenged on the ground that it does not comply with the methods Congress required the State to follow before it could lease or sell the lands granted from the United States in the New Mexico-Arizona Enabling Act of 1910, 36 Stat. 557, and which are repeated in the Arizona Constitution. The suit was brought against the Arizona Land Department and others. ASARCO Incorporated and other current mineral lessees of state school lands were permitted to intervene as defendants. Eventually the trial court certified the case as a defendant class action under Arizona Rule of Civil Procedure 23. The defendant class consisted of all present and future mineral lessees of state lands.
The trial court upheld the statute on cross-motions for summary [****6] judgment, and [**2042] respondents (the original plaintiffs) appealed. The Arizona Supreme Court reversed over the dissent of one justice, ruling that the statute is "unconstitutional and invalid as it pertains to nonhydrocarbon mineral leases." Kadish v. Arizona State Land Dept., 155 Ariz. 484, 498, 747 P. 2d 1183, 1197 (1987). It remanded the case to the trial court with instructions to enter summary judgment for respondents, to enter a judgment declaring § 27-234(B) invalid, and to consider what further relief, if any, might be appropriate.
Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.
490 U.S. 605 *; 109 S. Ct. 2037 **; 104 L. Ed. 2d 696 ***; 1989 U.S. LEXIS 2652 ****; 57 U.S.L.W. 4574
ASARCO INC. ET AL. v. KADISH ET AL.
Prior History: [****1] CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF ARIZONA.
Disposition: 155 Ariz. 484, 747 P. 2d 1183, affirmed.
leases, state court, federal court, federal law, mineral, taxpayers, parties, mineral land, restrictions, conditions, case or controversy, Jones Act, proceedings, invalid, mineral lease, invoke, grant land, decisions, merits, federal statute, schools, courts, trial court, state-court, redressed, binding, rights, standing requirement, state legislature, state law
Civil Procedure, Appeals, Appellate Jurisdiction, Final Judgment Rule, Justiciability, Case & Controversy Requirements, General Overview, Constitutional Law, Case or Controversy, Standing, Elements, Preliminary Considerations, The Judiciary, Congressional Limits, Jurisdiction, Subject Matter Jurisdiction, Judgments, Preclusion of Judgments, Full Faith & Credit, Full Faith & Credit Statutes, Exclusive Federal Jurisdiction, Supremacy Clause, US Supreme Court Review, Contracts Law, Types of Contracts, Lease Agreements, Mootness, Res Judicata, Jurisdiction on Certiorari, Considerations Governing Review, State Court Decisions, Governments, State & Territorial Governments, Legislatures, Declaratory Judgments, Jurisdictional Sources, Energy & Utilities Law, Royalties, Business & Corporate Compliance, Energy & Utilities Law, Federal Oil & Gas Leases, Local & State Regulation, Leases & Licenses, Royalty Clauses, Mining Industry, Mineral Leases, Real Property Law, Mining, Claims, Conveyances, Mineral Interests, Surface Rights, Oil, Gas & Mineral Interests, Financing, Grants & Reservations, Concurrent & Successive Interests, Surface Use Interests