California Court of Appeal

Judgment for defendants in dispute over crediting water recipients with revenues from the Oroville Dam hydropower is affirmed, where: 1) the State Water Project contract is not ambiguous on the subject of market rates, because its language, when read in light of governing law, is not reasonably susceptible of a reading that requires application of current market rates; 2) defendant acted within its statutory authority in the manner in which it treated profits due to resales of Oroville power, and any arguable contractual ambiguity regarding this treatment is properly resolved against plaintiffs by the practical construction rule, given a 20-year period of performance without challenge to DWR's administration of the contract; and 3) these conclusions vitiate plaintiffs' bad faith claim.

Appellate Information

• Decided 02/15/2013
• Published 02/15/2013

Judges

• DUARTE

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel