Summary
In Bekins v. Merced Irrigation District, 89 F.2d 1002 (9th Cir., 1937), explained in In re Merced Irrigation District, 25 F. Supp. 981, 986-987 (S.D.Cal. 1939), an irrigation district filed a petition under the Act later held unconstitutional in Ashton.
Summary of this case from In re RichardsonOpinion
No. 8165.
April 12, 1937.
Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Northern District of California, Northern Division; George Cosgrave, Judge.
Maurice Harrison, Brobeck, Phleger Harrison, tum Suden tum Suden, and Hugh K. McKevitt, all of San Francisco, Cal., Clark, Nichols Eltse, of Berkeley, Cal., W. Coburn Cook, of Turlock, Cal., Gillett Gillett, of Oakland, Cal., and Charles L. Childers, of Los Angeles, Cal., for appellants.
Downey, Brand Seymour, of Sacramento, Cal., Hugh K. Landram and C. Ray Robinson, both of Merced, Cal., and Orrick, Palmer Dahlquist, of San Francisco, Cal., for appellees.
Before WILBUR, GARRECHT, and HANEY, Circuit Judges.
Upon motion of appellants for advancement of cause for hearing, and for reversal of decree of the District Court herein, and after oral arguments thereon, ordered said motion granted, that a decree be filed and entered reversing the decree of said District Court, and remanding the cause with directions to dismiss the cause; mandate to issue in 40 days.