United States v. Bell
734 F.3d 1223, 13 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7673
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedJuly 22, 2013
DocketNos. 05-16154, 05-16187, 05-16157, 05-16189, 05-16158, 05-16909
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases
This text of 734 F.3d 1223 (United States v. Bell) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Bluebook
United States v. Bell, 734 F.3d 1223, 13 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7673 (9th Cir. 2013).
Opinion
[1225]*1225ORDER
The mandate of June 30, 2010 is withdrawn. The Opinion filed on April 20, 2010, is amended as follows: on slip Opinion page 5872, replace the Conclusion with the following:
For the foregoing reasons, the judgment of the district court with respect to prejudgment and postjudgment interest is vacated and remanded for further consideration. The judgment with respect to amounts of recoupment for excess diversions in 1974, 1975, 1978, 1979, and spills in 1979 and 1980, as well as the denial of recoupment for excess diversions in the years 1973, 1976, 1985, and 1986, is vacated and remanded for recalculation of the effect of gauge error. The judgment with respect to spills from 1981-84 is vacated and remanded for a determination of the amount of water spilled during those years. The judgment of the district court is otherwise affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Figueroa v. Gannett Company Incorporated
D. Arizona, 2022
All In One Trading, Inc., a California corporation v. Chaparala
C.D. California, 2020
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
734 F.3d 1223, 13 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7673, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-bell-ca9-2013.