Legal Opinion
City of Alturas v. Pacific Power & Light Company
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided May 30, 1995No. 93-17044Published
1Opinion of the Court
56 F.3d 70
NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.
CITY OF ALTURAS, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
PACIFIC POWER & LIGHT COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee.
No. 93-17044.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Argued and Submitted May 10, 1995.
Decided May 30, 1995.
Before CUMMINGS,* SCHROEDER, and RYMER, Circuit Judges.
1
MEMORANDUM**
2
The City of Alturas ("City") appeals the district court's…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Dale A. Price, Plaintiff-Cross-Defendant-Appellant v. Thomas Seydel and Nalani Seydel, Husband and Wife, Defendants-Cross-Claimants-AppelleesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1992
- La Mesa-Spring Valley School District v. Nobuo OtsukaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1962
- Joann Ravell v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1994
- City of San Jose v. Great Oaks Water Co.California Court of Appeal · 1987
- Pacificorp, a Maine Corporation, Dba Pacific Power & Light Company v. Bonneville Power AdministrationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1988
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.