Henry F. Reimann and Eunice W. Reimann, Husband and Wife v. United States

Good Law
315 F.2d 746·1963 U.S. App. LEXIS 5650
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 5, 196317800California2,043 words

Opinion

Opinion

Duniway, J.

This action arises under the Soil Bank Act, 7 U.S.C. §§ 1801-1837 , and particularly § 1831(d). The contract involved is a “Soil Bank Conservation Reserve Contract” entered into by appellant Henry F. Reimann as “producer” on November 24, 1958. Appellant Eunice W. Reimann is his wife, and did not sign the contract. The contract was approved for the Secretary of Agriculture on January 6,1959. It is of the type authorized by § 1831(a). While it differs from an “Acreage Reserve Agreement,” authorized under § 1821(a), it is in most respects similar and in many of its provisions identical to such a contract. We had occasion to consider the provisions of an “Acreage Reserve Agreement” at some length in Shay v. Agricultural Stabilization & Conservation State Comm., 9 Cir., 1962, 299 F.2d 516 .

The contract relates to a farm owned by appellants as community property and located seven miles northeast of Ashton, Idaho. Under the contract, 276.8 acres were designated as conservation reserve acreage, to be established and maintained with a permanent cover of grass and legumes for a period of ten years, 1959-68, the maximum period authorized by § 1833(b). This was all of the cropland on the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.