Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Board of Supervisors v. King Land Corp.

Supreme Court of Virginia

Decided June 9, 1989No. Record 871056Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partJustice Lacy

I concur with the majority’s holding that, even though Code § 32.1-182 contains no specific compliance deadline, the State Board of Health was required to adopt regulations insuring that the safety and public health costs associated with abandoned landfills be borne by the person abandoning the landfill.1 The majority’s application of the “mischief rule,” however, simply does not support the remedy imposed — invalidation of the landfill operation permit issued by the Commissioner of Health to King Land Corporation. Neither the language nor the history of the statutes supports a conclusion…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. King Land Corp. v. Board of SupervisorsCourt of Appeals of Virginia · 1987

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

Powered by the Exa API