UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE,
v.
IMPERIAL IRRIGATION DISTRICT, A CORPORATION, DEFENDANT-APPELLEE, JOHN M. BRYANT ET AL., DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DEFENDANT-APPELLEE, BEN YELLEN ET AL., APPELLANTS
Before BROWNING and KOELSCH, Circuit Judges and WOLLENBERG * District Judge.
In our opinion of August 18, 1977, 559 F. 2d 509, this Court reversed the judgment of the district court. In so doing, we failed to state that we affirm that portion of the trial court’s decision, stipulated to by the parties, that the acreage limitation provisions of the reclamation law have no application to lands owned by the State of California in its Imperial Water Fowl Management Area.
ACCORDINGLY, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this Court’s opinion of August 18, 1977, be modified such that the judgment of the district court is reversed, except insofar as it determines that the acreage limitation provisions of the reclamation law have no application to lands owned by the State of California in its Imperial Water Fowl Management Area.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Arie Mack Moore v. JAS. H. Matthews & Co., 682 F.2d 830 (9th Cir. 1982)
-
Russell v. Commissioner OF Internal Revenue, 678 F.2d 782 (9th Cir. 1982)
-
Roy and Josie Fisher v. Tucson Sch. Dist. No. ONE, 625 F.2d 834 (9th Cir. 1980)
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- United States v. Imperial Irrigation Dist., 559 F.2d 509 (9th Cir. 1977)