Arizona v. California Et Al.

Supreme Court

Arizona v. California Et Al.

347 U.S. 986, 74 S. Ct. 848, 98 L. Ed. 1121, 1954 U.S. LEXIS 1995

CourtSupreme Court of the United States

DecidedJune 1, 1954

Docket10, Original

StatusPublished

Cited by8 cases

This text of 347 U.S. 986 (Arizona v. California Et Al.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Arizona v. California Et Al., 347 U.S. 986, 74 S. Ct. 848, 98 L. Ed. 1121, 1954 U.S. LEXIS 1995 (1954).

Pincite

Opinion

*986 It is ordered that George I. Haight, Esquire, of Chicago, Illinois, be, and he is hereby, appointed special master in this cause, with 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 find the facts specially and state separately his conclusions of law thereon, and to submit the same to this Court with all convenient speed, together with, a draft of the decree recommended by him. The findings, conclusions, and recommended decree of the master shall be subject to consideration, revision, or approval by the Court. The master shall be allowed his actual expenses and a reasonable compensation for his services to be fixed hereafter by the Court. The allowances to him, the compensation paid to his stenographic and clerical assistants, and the cost of printing his report shall be charged against and be borne by the parties in such proportion as the Court hereafter may direct. If the appointment herein made of a master is not accepted, or if the place becomes vacant during the recess of the Court, the Senior Associate Justice shall have authority to make a new designation which shall have the same effect as if originally made by the Court herein.

The Chief Justice took no part in the consideration or decision of this order.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

*986 It is ordered that George I. Haight, Esquire, of Chicago, Illinois, be, and he is hereby, appointed special master in this cause, with 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 find the facts specially and state separately his conclusions of law thereon, and to submit the same to this Court with all convenient speed, together with, a draft of the decree recommended by him. The findings, conclusions, and recommended decree of the master shall be subject to consideration, revision, or approval by the Court. The master shall be allowed his actual expenses and a reasonable compensation for his services to be fixed hereafter by the Court. The allowances to him, the compensation paid to his stenographic and clerical assistants, and the cost of printing his report shall be charged against and be borne by the parties in such proportion as the Court hereafter may direct. If the appointment herein made of a master is not accepted, or if the place becomes vacant during the recess of the Court, the Senior Associate Justice shall have authority to make a new designation which shall have the same effect as if originally made by the Court herein.

The Chief Justice took no part in the consideration or decision of this order.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

347 U.S. 986, 74 S. Ct. 848, 98 L. Ed. 1121, 1954 U.S. LEXIS 1995, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/arizona-v-california-et-al-scotus-1954.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack