Skip to main content
· 1/21/1891

Ball v. Kehl

Citations

  • 87 Cal. 505
  • 25 P. 679
  • 1891 Cal. LEXIS 1012

Syllabus

<p>Water Rights — Appropriation for Special Use — Rights of Subsequent Appropriator—Temporary Diversion—Injunction—Insufficient Findings. — In an action by a subsequent appropriator of water for purposes of irrigation and domestic use, to restrain its diversion when not needed by a prior appropriator for mill purposes, an allegation that the defendant was continuing, and that he threatened to continue, to divert the water, when not needed for mill purposes, is material; and a finding that on a certain day the defendant deprived the plaintiff of the use of the water is insufficient to sustain an injunction, without a finding as to how long the deprivation continued, or as to whether the defendant threatened to continue it.</p>

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • holding that an attorney violated Rule 1.16 (d) by failing to refund a fee that had not 15 been earned
  • agreeing with special master’s report that determined, in part, that an attorney violated Rule 1.16 (d) by failing to refund an unearned fee

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Haven

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.