Legal Opinion
United States v. City of Painesville, Ohio
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Decided March 26, 1981No. 78-3551PublishedCited by 25 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
WISEMAN, District Judge.
The first of two questions before the Court is whether the district court erred in holding that a boiler operated by the Painesville Municipal Electric Utility is a “new source” under section 111(a)(2) of the Clean Air Act [the Act], 42 U.S.C. § 7411(aX2) (Supp. Ill 1979). 1 The second issue is whether the district court was required to hold an evidentiary hearing before permanently enjoining the City of Painesville from emitting sulfur dioxide from its boiler in excess of the Environmental Protection Agency’s [EPA’s] “new source” standards for sulfur dioxide [SOJ. The…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Udall v. TallmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Tennessee Valley Authority v. HillSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Hecht Co. v. BowlesSupreme Court of the United States · 1944
- Train v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1975
- United States v. SuttonCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1980
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- Shawnee Coal Company v. Cecil D. Andrus, Secretary of the InteriorCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1981
- Sierra Club v. Franklin County Power of Illinois, LLCCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2008
- National Steel Corporation, Great Lakes Steel Division v. Anne B. Gorsuch, Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection AgencyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1983
- United States v. Massachusetts Water Resources AuthorityCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2001
- Sierra Pacific Power Company and Idaho Power Company v. United States Environmental Protection AgencyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1981
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.