Nebraska v. Wyoming

1987-06-22
Share:

Headline: Court appoints a Special Master to manage filings and gather evidence, lets him summon witnesses and issue subpoenas, and directs that parties will later bear his costs as the case proceeds.

Holding: The Court appointed Owen Olpin as Special Master with authority to set filing schedules, direct proceedings, take testimony, issue subpoenas, receive evidence, and ordered the parties to bear the Master’s costs.

Real World Impact:
  • Gives an appointed official power to schedule filings and collect evidence.
  • Allows the Special Master to summon witnesses and issue subpoenas.
  • Makes the parties responsible for the Master’s fees and related costs as ordered.
Topics: court-appointed official, case scheduling, evidence gathering, joining a lawsuit

Summary

Background

This order appoints Owen Olpin, Esquire, of Los Angeles, as Special Master in the case. The Court gives him power to set times and conditions for filing additional pleadings and to direct further proceedings. The order says he can summon witnesses, issue subpoenas, and take evidence he deems necessary. Several motions from groups including Basin Electric Power Cooperative, Platte River Trust, National Audubon Society, and Nebraska Public Power District for permission to join the case were referred to the Special Master.

Reasoning

The Court authorized the Special Master to manage pretrial and evidentiary steps by letting him control scheduling, receive testimony, and compile evidence. It also directed the Master to submit whatever reports he thinks appropriate. The Court decided that the usual costs of the Master — including compensation for him and his assistants, printing, and travel — will be charged to the parties in proportions the Court will later determine. The order does not resolve the main dispute between the parties; it only creates a process to gather facts and handle intervention requests.

Real world impact

The appointed Special Master will run much of the case’s fact-gathering and administrative work. Witnesses may be called and documents produced under the Master’s direction. The parties asking to join the case will have their requests considered by the Master. The parties should expect to share the Master’s fees and related costs as the Court later specifies, and the ruling is a procedural step rather than a final decision on the underlying legal claims.

Ask about this case

Ask questions about the entire case, including all opinions (majority, concurrences, dissents).

What was the Court's main decision and reasoning?

How did the dissenting opinions differ from the majority?

What are the practical implications of this ruling?

Related Cases