James v. Ball

Good Law
613 F.2d 180
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 6, 198076-1918California7,881 words

Opinion

Opinion

613 F.2d 180 JAMES, Roland W., Fitzsimons, James R., Brahs, Dwight M., Sacco, Frank, and Maffeo, John H., on behalf of themselves and their respective classes, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. BALL, Germain H., Conovaloff, Alex M., Rousseau, Bill, Smith, Leo C., Williams, John M., Jr., Hurley, Thomas P., Schrader, William P., Hoopes, John S., Fitch, W. Larkin, and Finley, Thomas J., in their capacity as members of the Board of Dir., Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement and Power District, and Abel, Karl F., in his capacity as President of the Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement and Power District, Defendants-Appellees. No. 76-1918. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Oct. 12, 1979. Rehearing Denied Feb. 6, 1980. Bruce E. Meyerson, Phoenix, Ariz., for plaintiffs-appellants. Jon L. Kyl, Jennings, Strouss & Salmon, Phoenix, Ariz., for defendants-appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona. Before CHOY and KENNEDY, Circuit Judges, and HALL, * District Judge. KENNEDY, Circuit Judge: 1 This appeal, from an action commenced in the District of Arizona, challenges the constitutionality of Arizona statutes which provide that…

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.