OCR Text |
Show tion Law. Said proposed contract as executed as alleged in the plaintiffs' complaint being the same contract, a true and correct copy of which is attached to the plaintiffs' complaint marked Exhibit "A" and by reference thereto made a part of said complaint. Finding No. 5. That said proposed contract was signed and executed as provided by law, by the United States of America acting for that purpose by Ray Lyman Wilbur, Secretary of the Interior on the 1st day of December, 1932. Finding No. 6. That on the 5th. day of December, 1932, at a regular adjourned meeting of the Board of Directors of Imperial Irrigation District duly and regularly held on said day at the usual and regular place of meeting of said Board of Directors at least three members thereof being present and voting therefor, the said Board of Directors by resolution approved the said proposed contract as to form. Finding No. 7. That after said Board of Directors had approved said proposed contract as to form as hereinabove found and on the same day, to-wit, on the 5th. day of December, 1932, and at the same meeting of said Board of Directors and at the same place, at least three members of said Board being present and voting therefor, by resolution directed the Secretary of said Board of Directors to submit the proposal to enter into said contract with the United States, as embodied in said proposed contract, with such plans and estimates of cost as had been made in connection therewith to the State Engineer of the State of California, for his examination and report as provided by law. |
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] : California exhibits. |