Tregea v. Modesto Irrigation District
Supreme Court of the United States
ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. On March 7, 1887, the legislature of the State of California passed an act, (Stat. Cal. 1887, 29,) whose scope and purpose were disclosed in the first section: “Seo. 1. Whenever fifty, or a majority-of freeholders owning lands susceptible of one mode of irrigation from a common source, and by the same system of works, desire to provide for the irrigation of the same, they may propose the organization of an irrigation…
Read the full summary
ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. On March 7, 1887, the legislature of the State of California passed an act, (Stat. Cal. 1887, 29,) whose scope and purpose were disclosed in the first section: “Seo. 1. Whenever fifty, or a majority-of freeholders owning lands susceptible of one mode of irrigation from a common source, and by the same system of works, desire to provide for the irrigation of the same, they may propose the organization of an irrigation district under the provisions of this act, and when so organized such districts ,shall have the powers conferred, or that…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Beewee
A motion was made to dismiss this case on the ground of the lack of a Federal question. It appears from' the opinion of the Supreme Court of the State that the defendant contended before it that the attempt to bind the reconstituted district — that is, the district diminished by the exclusion of 28,000 acres, and in which his property was situated — by a vote of the district prior to such exclusion in respect to the issue of bonds, was in violation of section 10, article I of the Constitution of the United States; and that it overruled and denied such contention. So there was considered by…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Carroll County v. SmithSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- County of Warren v. MarcySupreme Court of the United States · 1878
- Orleans v. PlattSupreme Court of the United States · 1879
- Scotland County v. HillSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Thompson v. PerrineSupreme Court of the United States · 1881
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by28 opinions
- The Title & Document Restoration Co. v. KerriganCalifornia Supreme Court · 1906
- Application of Oklahoma Turnpike AuthoritySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1950
- Fidelity Nat. Bank & Trust Co. of Kansas City v. SwopeSupreme Court of the United States · 1927
- People v. RichmondMichigan Supreme Court · 2010
- Interstate Trust Co. v. Montezuma Valley Irrigation DistrictSupreme Court of Colorado · 1919
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.