Legal Opinion
City of Cleveland v. Public Utilities Commission
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided December 23, 1980No. 80-233PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Per curiam
The first issue for this court’s determination is whether the commission is preempted from ordering a shutdown of a nuclear generating plant by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, Sections 2011 et seq., Title 42 of the U. S. Code.
Section 2011, Title 42, U. S. Code, states:
“Atomic energy is capable of application for peaceful as well as military purposes. It is therefore declared to be the policy of the United States that—
*211“(a) the development, use, and control of atomic energy shall be directed so as to make the maximum contribution to the general welfare, subject at all times to the…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Florida Lime & Avocado Growers, Inc. v. PaulSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Bethlehem Steel Co. v. New York State Labor Relations BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- Campbell v. HusseySupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Northern States Power Company v. The State of Minnesota, the Minnesota Pollution Control AgencyCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1971
- City of Cincinnati v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1949
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Ashlock v. Sunwest Bank of Roswell, N.A.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1988
- Marketing Research Services, Inc. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1987
- Cleveland Elec. Illum. Co. v. Pub. Util. Comm.Ohio Supreme Court · 1996
- State v. Flowers, 22751 (4-17-2009)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2009
- County of Suffolk v. Long Island Lighting Co.District Court, E.D. New York · 1983
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.