Home/Ninth Circuit/Shasta County v. Balaklala Consol. Copper Co.

Shasta County v. Balaklala Consol. Copper Co.

278 F. 158, 1922 U.S. App. LEXIS 1707
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedJanuary 9, 1922
DocketNo. 3762
StatusPublished

This text of 278 F. 158 (Shasta County v. Balaklala Consol. Copper Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Shasta County v. Balaklala Consol. Copper Co., 278 F. 158, 1922 U.S. App. LEXIS 1707 (9th Cir. 1922).

Opinion

HUNT, Circuit Judge.

Upon authority of County of Shasta v. Mountain Copper Co., Limited, 278 Fed. 155, the decree of the District Court is affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

Related

Shasta County v. Mountain Copper Co.
278 F. 155 (Ninth Circuit, 1922)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
278 F. 158, 1922 U.S. App. LEXIS 1707, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shasta-county-v-balaklala-consol-copper-co-ca9-1922.