OCR Text |
Show IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES October Term, 19t>7 No. 10 Original STATE OP ARIZONA, Complainant, v. state of California, palo vERde irrigation district, imperial IRRIGATION DISTRICT, COACHELLA VALLEY COUNTY WATER 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 SAM DIEGO, CALIFORNIA, Defendants, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Intervener, STATE OP NEVADA, Intervener, STATE OP NEW MEXICO, Impleaded, :State of utah, impleaded. COMPLAINANT's AMENDED RESPONSE TO COMPLAINT AND ANSWER IN INTERVENTION 3Y THE STATE OF UTAH Complainant Miles ita Amended Response to the Coraplal:it anci Answer in Intervention L>y Lne ,;tai': 01' Utah aj i'ullows: |
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] : |