Home/Ninth Circuit/The State of California, Acting by and Through the Department of Water Resources v. The Oroville-Wyandotte Irrigation District, an Irrigation District

The State of California, Acting by and Through the Department of Water Resources v. The Oroville-Wyandotte Irrigation District, an Irrigation District

536 F.2d 304, 1976 U.S. App. LEXIS 8745
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedJune 3, 1976
Docket75-3091
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 536 F.2d 304 (The State of California, Acting by and Through the Department of Water Resources v. The Oroville-Wyandotte Irrigation District, an Irrigation District) 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
The State of California, Acting by and Through the Department of Water Resources v. The Oroville-Wyandotte Irrigation District, an Irrigation District, 536 F.2d 304, 1976 U.S. App. LEXIS 8745 (9th Cir. 1976).

Opinion

OPINION

Before HUFSTEDLER and CHOY, Circuit Judges, and PREGERSON, * District Judge.

PER CURIAM:

This is an appeal in a controversy between two agencies of the State of California, the Department of Water Resources and The Or oville-Wyandotte Irrigation District. The principal issue is whether Decision 82561 of the California Public Utilities Commission issued March 12, 1974 in Application No. 48869 conflicts with the order of *305 the Federal Power Commission issued January 17, 1974 affecting Projects 2088 and 2100.

In a well-written and comprehensive memorandum decision issued on August 8, 1975, and reported in 411 F.Supp. 361 (E.D. Cal.1975), Judge Thomas J. MacBride held that CPUC decision and the FPC order were entirely compatible. We agree for the reasons set forth in Judge MacBride’s decision.

AFFIRMED.

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

Related

Linthicum v. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
D. Oregon, 2023
Narragansett Electric Co. v. Constellation Energy Commodities Group, Inc.
526 F. Supp. 2d 260 (D. Rhode Island, 2007)
United States v. Southern California Edison Co.
300 F. Supp. 2d 964 (E.D. California, 2004)
Iams Co. v. Falduti
974 F. Supp. 1263 (E.D. Missouri, 1997)
New Orleans Public Service, Inc. v. The City of New Orleans, the Council for the City of New Orleans, Sidney J. Barthelemy
782 F.2d 1236 (Fifth Circuit, 1986)
City of Gainesville v. Florida Power & Light Co.
488 F. Supp. 1258 (S.D. Florida, 1980)
City of Cleveland v. The Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company
570 F.2d 123 (Sixth Circuit, 1978)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
536 F.2d 304, 1976 U.S. App. LEXIS 8745, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/the-state-of-california-acting-by-and-through-the-department-of-water-ca9-1976.