Nampa & Meridian Irr. Dist. v. Bond
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
1Opinion of the CourtRudkin, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts as above). While conceding that the Secretary of the Interior has authority to provide for drainage under the Reclamation Act, the appellant insists that such provision must be made as a part of the original construction cost, or by agreement with a majority of the landowners affected under the act of 1914, and that the cost of drainage cannot be included in the maintenance and operation charge. The appellee, on the other hand, contends that it is a proper maintenance and operation charge, and that, in any event, under the terms of its contract with the United States,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Schmidt v. Louisville, C. & L. Railway Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1904
3Cited by7 opinions
- Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District v. BondSupreme Court of the United States · 1925
- Willard v. Glenn-Colusa Irrigation DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
- Dalles Irrigation District v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2008
- United States v. Fort Belknap Irrigation DistrictDistrict Court, D. Montana · 1961
- Sperry v. Elephant Butte Irr. Dist. of New MexicoNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1928
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.