New York Trust Co. v. Farmers' Irr. Dist.
Decision Date | 14 April 1922 |
Docket Number | 5916.,5915 |
Citation | 280 F. 785 |
Parties | NEW YORK TRUST CO. et al. v. FARMERS' IRR. DIST. FARMERS' IRR. DIST. v. NEW YORK TRUST CO. et al. |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit |
[Copyrighted Material Omitted]
Some years prior to June 22, 1915, there existed a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the state of New Jersey, known as the Tri-State Land Company. This corporation had been engaged in the construction and completion of an irrigation project in the counties of Morrill and Scotts Bluff, Neb., which was to be supplied with water taken from the North Platte river through a gravity canal, the headgate of which was about one-half mile east of the Nebraska-Wyoming state boundary line on the north side of the North Platte river and of a total length of approximately 86 miles. Upon completion of the canal the operation thereof was placed in charge of the Farmers' Mutual Canal Company, a subsidiary corporation of the Tri-State Land Company. On or about January 23, 1913, said irrigation canal and its headgate, and all of the irrigation works and the appurtenances thereunto belonging, were transferred and conveyed by the Tri-State Land Company and the Farmers' Mutual Canal Company to the Farmers' Irrigation District, a Nebraska corporation, in consideration of bonds of said district of the aggregate par value of $2,703,000, bearing interest at 6 per centum per annum, payable semiannually, no part of the principal of which was to be paid during the first 10 years. Said bonds were deposited by the Tri-State Land Company with and turned over to the New York Trust Company as collateral security to secure the payment of certain bonds theretofore issued by said Tri-State Land Company in the principal sum of $1,691,000, of which bonds the said New York Trust Company was trustee.
For a long time prior to June, 1915, the Farmers' Irrigation District and the Tri-State Land Company had been insolvent and without pecuniary resources to meet their obligations and the irrigation project, which had been constructed as heretofore stated and transferred to the Farmers' Irrigation District, was in danger of becoming an absolute failure, with the consequent loss of all money that had been invested therein. A bondholders' committee, the Tri-State Land Company, and the Farmers' Irrigation District had been engaged continuously in trying to solve the problem of how to continue the operation of the irrigation system and the distribution of water for the benefit of the agricultural lands lying within the boundaries of the district. There had been efforts made and negotiations had with the reclamation officers of the United States, in charge of what is known as the North Platte irrigation project, which obtains its water for irrigation purposes from the Pathfinder reservoir, located on the North Platte river in the state of Wyoming. The Tri-State Land Company had entered into a contract with the United States by which the Land Company had obligated itself to pay $500,000 for the right to take water from the Pathfinder reservoir, there was a balance of $475,000 due on the contract, and the failure to make the stipulated payment had caused the United States to threaten a forfeiture of the right. The United States was desirous of having the Farmers' Irrigation District assume this contract and of acquiring the permanent carriage right of 250 second feet of water through the main canal of the Farmers' Irrigation District from the North Platte river to Red Willow creek for the irrigation of an additional unit to be included in the North Platte project of the United States. In this condition of affairs, the Tri-State Land Company bondholders' committee, by C. N. Wright, agent, and W. N. Ferguson, bondholder, made the following proposal to the Farmers' Irrigation District: Irrigation District:
'Dated this 22d day of June, 1915.
'Tri-State Land Company Bondholders' Committee,
'By C. N. Wright, Agent.
'W. N. Ferguson, Bondholder.'
In consideration of said proposal, the electors of the Farmers' Irrigation District, at an election duly held, voted in favor of the adoption and ratification of the carriage contract heretofore mentioned and the assumption by the Farmers' Irrigation District of the obligation of said $475,000 owing to the United States by the Tri-States Land Company. The committee appointed in the proposal met from time to time for the purpose of framing and perfecting a course of procedure by which the United States could enter into a contract to take over and operate the works and system of the Farmers' Irrigation District during the period in which said bonds were being paid and satisfied. These negotiations were carried on for a period of more than two years, and required repeated visits to Washington, D.C., for the purpose of making a complete presentation of the entire scheme to the Department of the Interior and the United States Reclamation Service. As a result of these negotiations the following contract was executed by and between the United States and the Farmers' Irrigation District:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State ex rel. Kansas City v. State Highway Commission
... ... Kansas City, 337 Mo. 47, 85 S.W.2d 104; New York ... Trust Co. v. Farmers' Irrigation District, 280 F ... State ex rel. Consolidated School Dist. of Pike County v ... Haid, 328 Mo. 739, 41 S.W.2d 806; ... ...
-
Bridgeport Irr. Dist. v. United States
...29 S. Ct. 527, 53 L. Ed. 836. The act must therefore be construed as an independent act complete in itself. New York Trust Co. v. Farmers' Irrigation District (C. C. A.) 280 F. 785. Sections 3465 and 3466 were therefore neither amended nor repealed by chapter 205, Laws of Nebraska 1915. An ......
-
James v. Davis
... ... and from there in carload lots to New York and other Eastern ... markets. For this purpose, special ... ...
-
Kelly Associates, Ltd. v. Aetna Cas. and Sur. Co.
...to an insurance contract or otherwise. We therefore turn to other jurisdictions. In a non-insurance case, New York Trust Co. v. Farmers' Irr. Dist., 280 F. 785, 795 (8th Cir.1922), the court noted that the "primary meaning" of the words is "to assume control or management Two cases have spe......
-
Neb. Const. art. III § III-14 Bills and Resolutions Read By Title; Printing; Vote For Final Passage; Bills to Contain One Subject; Amended Section to Be Set Forth; Signing of Bills
...on irrigation district was independent act, complete in itself, not governed by this section. New York Trust Co. v. Farmers Irr. Dist., 280 F. 785 (8th Cir. 4. Amendatory acts The Depressant and Stimulant Drugs Act of 1967 did not violate this section. State v. Waechter, 189 Neb. 433, 203 N......