Legal Opinion

United States v. City of Akron

District Court, N.D. Ohio

Decided March 17, 2011No. Case 5:09CV272PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER

JOHN R. ADAMS, District Judge.

This matter appears before the Court on the Government’s unopposed motion for entry of the proposed consent decree (“the Decree”). The motion is DENIED.

I. Combined Sewers Explained

Generally, there are two types of water collection systems: combined sewer systems and separate sanitary sewer systems. For decades, separate sanitary sewer systems have been the exclusive systems constructed in the United States. As a result, combined sewers are “artifacts of an earlier way of collecting sewage and storm water.” Doc. 68-1 at 3. Mark Klingenstein, a licensed…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. City of Detroit v. Grinnell Corporation, Manhattan-Ward, Incorporated v. Grinnell Corporation, 1225 Vine Street Building, Inc. v. Grinnell CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1974
  2. United States v. Microsoft Corporation. United States of America v. Microsoft CorporationCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1995
  3. United States v. Akzo Coatings of America, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1991
  4. United States v. Lexington-Fayette Urban County GovernmentCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2010

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. United States of America v. Sanitary District of Highland, IndianaDistrict Court, N.D. Indiana · 2022
  2. United States of America v. United States Steel CorporationDistrict Court, N.D. Indiana · 2021

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

Powered by the Exa API