1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.Supp.
  4. 38 F.Supp.
  5. 38 F.Supp. 770 (1941)
 

IN RE IMPERIAL IRR. DIST.

No. 1542.

38 F.Supp. 770 (1941)

In re IMPERIAL IRR. DIST.

District Court, S. D. California, S. D.

February 24, 1941.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Harry W. Horton and George R. Kirk, both of El Centro, Cal., for Imperial Irr. Dist.

Orrick, Dahlquist, Neff & Herrington, of San Francisco, Cal., for bondholders' committee.

Call, Murphey & Davis, of Los Angeles, Cal., for certain nondepositing bondholders.

Clark, Nichols & Eltse, of Berkeley, Cal., for Mary E. Morris, bondholder.

W. Coburn Cook, of Turlock, Cal., for Hillcrest Trading Corporation, bondholder.

JENNEY, District Judge.

Findings Under the New Rules.

In its order of December 26, 1940, calling for briefs and arguments on the submitted findings of fact, conclusions of law, form of interlocutory decree, and objections and amendments thereto, the court stated: "Counsel should bear in mind that the court has expressed itself in favor of approving the proposed Plan of Composition. Therefore, objections should be directed to form rather than to legal theory...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases