| OCR Text |
Show IN THE Supreme Court of the United States OCTOBER TERM, 1933 No.....................(Original) STATE OF ARIZONA Complainant, VS. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, STATE OF COLORADO, STATE OF NEVADA, STATE OF NEW MEXICO, STATE OF UTAH, STATE OF WYOMING, HAROLD L. ICKES, Secretary of the Interior of the United States, PALO VERDE IRRIGATION DISTRICT, a public corporation of the State of California, IMPERIAL IRRIGATION DISTRICT, a public corporation, of the State of California, COACHELLA VALLEY COUNTY WATER DISTRICT, a public corporation of the State of California, METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA, a public corporation of the State of California, CITY OF LOS ANGELES, a municipal corporation of the State of California, CITY OF SAN DIEGO, a municipal corporation of the State of California, and COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, a public corporation of the State of California, Defendants. BRIEF OF COMPLAINANT STATE OF ARIZONA IN SUPPORT OF ITS MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE BILL TO PERPETUATE TESTIMONY AND IN ANSWER TO BRIEFS FILED IN SUPPORT OF OBJECTIONS THERETO Arthur T. LaPrade, Attorney General of the State of Arizona, Solicitor for Complainant. Charles A. Carson, Jr. A. M. Crawford, Of Counsel. |
| Source |
Original book: [State of Arizona, complainant v. State of California, Palo Verde Irrigation District, Coachella Valley County Water District, Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, City of Los Angeles, California, City of San Diego, California, and County of San Diego, California, defendants, United States of America, State of Nevada, State of New Mexico, State of Utah, interveners] : |
