Abatti wants rehearing from appellate court

IMPERIAL — The three-year battle over water rights between a local farmer and the Imperial Irrigation District is far from over.

Local farmer and former Imperial Irrigation District Director Mike Abatti believes Fourth District Appellate Court justices made errors in IID’s appeal in June of a lower court’s 2017 ruling on water rights, so his attorney plans to petition the appeals court for a rehearing.

After a three-year battle, the justices reversed the lower court’s rulings against IID regarding water rights while siding with Abatti on flaws in the district’s Equitable Distribution Plan.

A petition for a rehearing, while not that unusual, is allowed if either the appellant or respondent believes the court of appeal made a legal mistake in its opinion. They then can petition for rehearing.

A petition for rehearing asks the court to reconsider its decision.

While any party has the option to petition for a rehearing, generally, the party who lost in the court of appeal, Abatti in this instance, petitions for a rehearing.

Abatti and his attorney Cheryl Orr must have proof the appeals court made a legal mistake, such as if the decision contains an error of law or fact, or if the decision does not address an important issue in the appeal. The court generally will not consider issues a party has not raised before, with a few exceptions.

Orr requested from the appellate court that since its opinion was “dense” and long at 106 pages, she be allowed 14,000 words in the petition instead of the 7,000 words normally allowed. The court denied the request.

Orr has 15 days from when the justice’s order was released to petition for a rehearing, so her deadline is 5 p.m. Friday.

A petition rehearing is also required for the case to be forwarded to the California Supreme Court, but if the justices do not respond to the petition within 30 days, it automatically goes to California’s highest court.