Legal Opinion
Columbus & Franklin County Metropolitan Park District v. Shank
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided November 10, 1992No. 91-1721PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtSweeney, J.
I
The present controversy centers on the application of the state antidegradation rule embodied in Ohio Adm.Code 3745-1-05. However, a thorough understanding of this regulation is impossible without considering the history of federal and state efforts to reduce widespread water pollution, the current statutory approach to the elimination of pollution and the role of the federal antidegradation standard in furthering this national policy. For a detailed history of federal legislation in this area, see Appendix.
The Water Quality Act of 1965, Pub.L. No. 89-234, 79 Stat. 903, required states to…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Environmental Protection Agency v. California Ex Rel. State Water Resources Control BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Arkansas v. OklahomaSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Chemical Manufacturers Ass'n v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1985
- E. I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co. v. TrainSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Wine & Spirits Wholesalers of Colorado, Inc. v. Colorado Department of Revenue, Liquor Enforcement DivisionColorado Court of Appeals · 1996
- Internat'l Bhd., Elec. v. Vaughn Ind.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2004
- Waste Management of Ohio, Inc. v. Board of HealthOhio Court of Appeals · 2005
- International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers v. Vaughn Industries, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2004
- Vaughn Industries, Inc. v. Dimech ServicesOhio Court of Appeals · 2006
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.