Nevada National Bank of San Francisco v. Board of Supervisors

The judgment or decree from which the appeal has been taken is as follows:

The action is based upon the provisions of section 39 of “An Act to provide for the organization and government of irrigation districts, approved March 31, 1897,” which is in the following language:

The bonded indebtedness herein involved was incurred prior to the enactment of said statute, but this circumstance is unimportant in view of the fact that the act of 1889 passed prior to the issuance of the said bonds and amending the act of 1887, known as the Wright Irrigation Act, contains á provision identical, as far as the question before us is concerned, with said section 39 of the act of 1897. The judgment herein is vigorously assailed by numerous counsel, including a learned “friend of the court,” and we have examined with care the points and cases to which our attention has been directed, and we shall proceed to state our views thereon in the order in which the various propositions are advanced in the briefs.

The position of appellants, as stated by counsel, is that the judgment must be set aside and the writ vacated, because:

In .addition to the foregoing, the brief filed by “amicus curiae”…