State of California ex rel. State Lands Commission v. Superior Court of Sacramento County

900 P.2d 648 (1995)

From our private database of 46,500+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

State of California ex rel. State Lands Commission v. Superior Court of Sacramento County

California Supreme Court
900 P.2d 648 (1995)

  • Written by Liz Nakamura, JD

Facts

Several landowners owned various plots of upland property in the Sacramento River’s Chicory Bend (collectively, the landowners) (defendants). Chicory Bend contained navigable tidewaters. Over a period of approximately 100 years, sand accretion created a 12-acre dry-lot over the riverbed in Chicory Bend. The landowners’ plots directly bordered this 12-acre dry-lot. It was uncertain whether, and to what extent, the accretion was caused by nearby human activities, such as dredging, wing-dams, or levees, or by accumulations of silt and debris related to hydraulic-mining operations. In the late 1800s, during California’s Gold Rush, hydraulic mining was used to wash away enormous quantities of land and soil, which was then sifted for gold before being deposited into California’s waterways, including the Sacramento River. Hydraulic mining has been prohibited for over 100 years; however, the silt and debris dislodged by hydraulic mining irreparably altered California’s waterways. Chicory Bend is far away from any old hydraulic-mining sites. The State of California (plaintiff) and the landowners each claimed ownership of the accreted 12-acre dry-lot. California brought a quiet-title action against the landowners, arguing that California retained title to the 12-acre dry-lot because (1) it was originally public-trust riverbed; and (2) the accretion was caused by the hydraulic mining, which meant it was caused by artificial means and California was entitled to retain title. The landowners countered, arguing that (a) they had a right to any natural accretions on their land; and (b) the 12-acre dry-lot was created by natural accretions because it was not caused by any local, manmade structure. The superior court granted summary judgment to the landowners. California appealed, and the appellate court affirmed, holding that accretion is natural if, as in Chicory Bend, it is caused by the normal flow of the river. California appealed to the California Supreme Court.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Arabian, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 832,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,500 briefs - keyed to 994 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership