Legal Opinion
United States v. Paul D. Hardy and Irma Alice Hardy
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
Decided November 2, 1966No. 8627PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
PICKETT, Circuit Judge.
The United States brought this action against Paul D. Hardy and Irma Alice Hardy to recover delinquent water payments alleged to be due the Uintah Indian Irrigation Project in Utah. The Hardys denied that the water payments were due, as the project had refused to deliver any water to their lands during the time alleged in the complaint. The trial court held that the water payments in the sum of $1361.30 were due, but were offset by damages in the amount of $3300.00, caused by the refusal to deliver water to the Hardys. The United States appeals, contending that an…
2Cited by10 opinions
- Consolidated Data Terminals, a California Corporation, and Cross-Appellant v. Applied Digital Data Systems, Inc., a Corporation, and Cross-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1983
- Paul S. Dopp v. Htp Corporation, Paul S. Dopp v. Htp Corporation, Paul S. Dopp v. Htp Corporation, Island Resorts, S.A.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1991
- T. J. Stevenson & Co. v. 81,193 Bags of FlourCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1980
- T. J. Stevenson & Co., Inc., a Corporation, and Counterclaimant, Appellee-Cross-Appellant v. 81,193 Bags of Flour, Etc., Adm Milling Co., Inc., Counterclaimant & Third Party Plaintiff- Cross-Appellee v. T. J. Stevenson & Co., Inc., Mv Nedon, Etc., as to Counterclaim, Republic of Bolivia, Ministry of Industry, Commerce and Tourism, Third Party Counterclaimant-Appellee, Cross-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1980
- Carden v. PenneyCourt of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 1978
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.