Legal Opinion

Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District v. Bond

Supreme Court of the United States

Decided April 13, 1925No. 135PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Sutherland

Appellant is an irrigation district organized as a public corporation under the laws of Idaho. In 1915, its supply of water being insufficient to irrigate the lands of all its members, it entered into a contract with the United States, at that time engaged in the construction of the Boise irrigation project, for wafer to irrigate the unsupplied lands and for the construction of a drainage system within the district. The district undertook , to represent" these lands in their relations to the government and collect from their owners and pay over to the government construction installments and…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Colburn v. WilsonIdaho Supreme Court · 1913
  2. Twin Falls Salmon River Land & Water Co. v. CaldwellCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1921
  3. Twin Falls Salmon River Land & Water Co. v. CaldwellSupreme Court of the United States · 1924
  4. Nampa & Meridian Irr. Dist. v. BondCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1923
  5. Schmidt v. Louisville, C. & L. Railway Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1904

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Casitas Municipal Water District v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2008
  2. Rank v. (Krug) United StatesDistrict Court, S.D. California · 1956
  3. United States v. Contra Costa County Water DistrictCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1982
  4. Foster v. Sunnyside Valley Irrigation DistrictWashington Supreme Court · 1984
  5. Fox v. IckesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1943

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API