OSMENT

v.

PITCAIRN ET AL., RECEIVERS

Citator

Cited By

• Kittitas Reclamation Dist. v. Sunnyside Valley Irrigation Dist., 626 F.2d 95 (9th Cir. 1980)
  …filed in the case requesting the court to determine the respective water rights of users of the waters of the Yakima River and its tributaries. During the pendency of this action, the decision in Fox v. Ickes, 137 F. 2d 30 (D.C.Cir.), cert. denied, 320 U.S. 792, 64 S.Ct. 204, 88 L.Ed. 477 (1943), was rendered. That decision, which dealt with the same Yakima Reclamation Project, essentially decided the issue of the obligation of the Bureau of Reclamation to deliver water within the Project. It was determine…
• United States v. Alpine Land & Reservoir Co., 697 F.2d 851 (9th Cir. 1983)
  …is a “specific congressional directive” which acts as a “restraint upon the Secretary.” See California v. United States, 438 U.S. 645, 678 n. 31, 98 S.Ct. 2985, 3002 n. 31, 57 L.Ed.2d 1018 (1978); Fox v. Ickes, 137 F. 2d 30 (D.C.Cir.), cert. denied, 320 U.S. 792, 64 S.Ct. 204, 88 L.Ed. 477 (1943); Lawrence v. Southard, 192 Wash. 287, 73 P. 2d 722 (1937). The district judge found that under the Nevada “relation back” doctrine, the 1903 statute did not affect the Project farmers’ rights which had vested in 1…
• Safe Harbor Water Power Corp. v. Fed. Power Comm'n, 179 F.2d 179 (3d Cir. 1949)
  …were a part of it. We appreciate the fact that our construction of the provisions of Section 20 is at variance with the dicta of two courts. See Niagara Falls Power Co. v. Federal Power Commission, 2 Cir., 137 F. 2d 787, 792-793, certiorari denied 320 U.S. 792, 64 S.Ct. 206, 88 L.Ed. 477, and Alabama Power Co. v. Federal Power Commission, 75 U.S.App.D.C. 315, 128 F. 2d 280, 293, certiorari denied 317 U.S. 652, 63 S.Ct. 48, 87 L.Ed. 525. Our first opinion squints in the same direction. But as Judge Learne…