NEBRASKA
v.
IOWA
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Nebraska v. Iowa involved a dispute between the two states over water rights or boundary issues, for which the Supreme Court appointed a Special Master to conduct proceedings and gather evidence. The Court designated Senior Judge Joseph P. Willson to replace the resigned Special Master Charles J. Vogel, granting him authority to manage filings, summon witnesses, and direct further proceedings. The Court ordered that all costs associated with the Special Master's work be shared by the parties as the Court would later determine.
© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
It Is Ordered that the Honorable Joseph P. Willson, Senior Judge of the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania, be, and he is hereby, appointed Special Master in this case in the place of the Honorable Charles J. Vogel, resigned. The Special Master shall have authority to fix the time and conditions for the filing of additional pleadings and to direct subsequent proceedings, and authority to summon witnesses, issue subpoenas, and take such evidence as may be introduced and such as he may deem it necessary to call for. The Master is directed to submit such reports as he may deem appropriate.
The Master shall be allowed his actual expenses. The allowances to him, the compensation paid to his technical, stenographic, and clerical assistants, the cost of printing his report, and all other proper expenses shall be charged against and be borne by the parties in such proportion as the Court hereafter may direct.
It Is Further Ordered that if the position of Special Master in this case becomes vacant during a recess of the Court, The Chief Justice shall have authority to make a new designation which shall have the same effect as if originally made by the Court herein.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
United States v. Covington, 395 U.S. 57 (U.S. 1969)…ct appeal from the dismissal of an indictment when the decision is one “sustaining a motion in bar” or “is based upon the invalidity or construction of the statute upon which the indictment or information is founded.” We noted probable jurisdiction, 393 U. S. 910 (1968),2 and the appeal was argued together with Leary v. United States, supra. As has been noted, the District Court dismissed the indictment on two alternative grounds. We begin with the second, which was that, assuming the Government’s construct…
-
Major Becton and Roosevelt Becton v. United States, 412 F.2d 1005 (8th Cir. 1969)…Leary v. United States, 383 F. 2d 851 (5 Cir. 1967) [and 392 F. 2d 220 (5 Cir. 1968)]. Later, it noted probable jurisdiction in United States v. Covington, 282 F.Supp. 886 (S.D.Ohio 1968), and set that case for argument immediately following Leary. 393 U.S. 910, 89 S.Ct. 238, 21 L.Ed.2d 197 (1958). Because of the identity of the constitutional issue which the Bectons argue to us with a constitutional issue present in both Leary and Covington, we deferred decision here until the Supreme Court had heard an…
-
Nebraska v. Iowa, 406 U.S. 117 (U.S. 1972)…6; Nebraska Laws 1943, c. 130; Act of July 12, 1943, 57 Stat. 494. Leave to file the action was granted in 1965. 379 U. S. 876 (1964); 379 U. S. 996 (1965). There have been successive Special Masters. See 380 U. S. 968 (1965); 392 U. S. 918 (1968); 393 U. S. 910 (1968). Senior Judge Joseph P. Willson completed the case after extensive hearings and filed his Report on November 9, 1971. 404 U. S. 933 (1971). The Exceptions of the States were orally argued before this Court on March 29, 1972. Iowa’s Exception…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Munkelwitz v. Hennepin Cnty. Welf. Dep't, 392 U.S. 918 (U.S. 1968)