Legal Opinion

City of Marshall v. City of Uncertain

Texas Supreme Court

Decided June 9, 2006No. 03-1111PublishedCited by 76 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice O’Neill

In 1986, the City of Marshall received a certificate of adjudication recognizing a right to divert and use up to 16,000 acre-feet of water from Cypress Creek for municipal use, meaning that the water it supplied had to be potable. In 2001, the City *99applied to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality1 to change the purpose of use in its certificate so that it could supply untreated water for industrial use. The City’s application did not request a change in the amount of water or rate of diversion. The City of Uncertain and others opposed the application, alleging the amendment would have…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. City of San Antonio v. City of BoerneTexas Supreme Court · 2003
  2. Texas Department of Transportation v. NeedhamTexas Supreme Court · 2002
  3. McIntyre v. RamirezTexas Supreme Court · 2003
  4. State Ex Rel. State Department of Highways & Public Transportation v. GonzalezTexas Supreme Court · 2002
  5. Texas Water Commission v. Brushy Creek Municipal Utility DistrictTexas Supreme Court · 1996

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by76 opinions

  1. Columbia Medical Center of Las Colinas, Inc. v. HogueTexas Supreme Court · 2008
  2. First American Title Insurance Co. v. CombsTexas Supreme Court · 2008
  3. Crosstex Energy Services, L.P. v. Pro Plus, Inc.Texas Supreme Court · 2014
  4. Hernandez v. EbromTexas Supreme Court · 2009
  5. Leordeanu v. American Protection Insurance Co.Texas Supreme Court · 2010

71 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API