OCR Text |
Show We do not propose here to argue evidentiary questions. The documents on which we rely may properly be brought to the Court's attention under orthodox canons of judicial notice. Courts regularly give great weight to formal administrative 2/ acts.-/ The courts have also relied upon informal administrative 3/ correspondence and acts,^ such as intradepartmental corres- 4/ pondence,-' interdepartmental correspondence within the federal 5/ government, correspondence with officials outside the federal United States v. Louisiana, 363 U.S. 1 (1960), was decided on motion for judgment on the pleadings on the basis of "a massive array of historical documents" (supra at 12) held to be judicially noticeable. See also United States v. Ahtanum Irr. Dist., 236 P.2d 321 (9th Cir. 1956), cert, denied, 352 U.S. 988 (1957). & See Fleming v. Mohawk Wrecking & Lumber Co., 331 U.S. Ill, 116 (1947); Colgate-Palmolive-Peet Co. v. United States, 320 U.S. 422, 426 (1943)J United States v. American Trucking Ass'ns, 310 U.S. 534, 549 (1940)j Queensboro Farms Prods, v. Wickard, 137 F.2d 969, 980 (2d Cir. 1943). See also United States v. Shreveport Grain & E. Co., 287 U.S. 77, 84 (1932). See Griswold, A Summary of the Regulations Problem, 54 Harv. L. Rev. 398, 417-19 (1941). FCC v. American Broadcasting Co., 347 U.S. 284, 294 (1954)j United States v. Ahtanum Irr. Dist., 236 F.2d 321, 330-31 n.12, 333 (9th Cir. 1956), cert, denied, 352 U.S. 988 (1957). United States v. Louisiana, 363 U.S. 1, 68 n.110 (i960); United States v. Zucca, 351 U.S. 91, 96 n.10 (1956); FCC v. American Broadcasting Co., 347 U.S. 284, 295 n.16 (1954); United States v. Ahtanum Irr. Dist., 236 F.2d 321, 331 n.12, 333. 334 n.19 (9th Cir. 1956), cert, denied, 352 U.S. 988 (1957). III-9 |