Legal Opinion
City of Tullahoma v. Bedford County
Tennessee Supreme Court
Decided January 27, 1997PublishedCited by 134 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
In reaction to the Court’s decision that Chapter 52 of the Private Acts of 1991 is inconsistent with general laws which mandate a comprehensive plan for the control of solid waste and is, therefore, invalid, Bedford County and the county clerk have filed a petition to rehear, the City of Tullahoma, et al. have filed a motion for clarification regarding the relief to which they are entitled and the Attorney General and the Commissioner of Environment and Conservation have filed a motion seeking permission to file an amicus brief on the petitions, all of which have been granted and are…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Union Carbide Corp. v. HuddlestonTennessee Supreme Court · 1993
- Tennessee Small School Systems v. McWherterTennessee Supreme Court · 1993
- Emerson College v. City of BostonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1984
- Crocker v. FinleyIllinois Supreme Court · 1984
- Brewster v. City of PocatelloIdaho Supreme Court · 1988
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by134 opinions
- Church v. PeralesCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 2000
- Sullivan v. Baptist Memorial HospitalTennessee Supreme Court · 1999
- Bradley v. McLeodCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1998
- Cherry v. WilliamsCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 2000
- Profill Development, Inc. v. DillsCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1997
129 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.