Chance v. BP Chemicals, Inc.
Ohio Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtAlice Robie Resnick, J.
This case presents unique questions surrounding the process of deepwell disposal of wastes. We stress at the outset that, because* appellee’s operation of the wells is authorized by the relevant regulating bodies, *23this case does not involve the general propriety of deepwell waste injection. This case also does not involve the specific question whether appellee should be using deepwell technology at its Lima facility.
The Ohio General Assembly has set up a scheme for the granting of permits for and the supervision of injection wells by state agencies. See R.C. 6111.043 and 6111.044, formerly…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- United States v. CausbySupreme Court of the United States · 1946
- Warner v. Waste Management, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1988
- Railroad Commission of Texas v. ManzielTexas Supreme Court · 1962
- Hinman v. Pacific Air TransportCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1936
- Keesecker v. G. M. McKelvey Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1943
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by54 opinions
- Apel v. KatzOhio Supreme Court · 1998
- Smith v. Kansas Gas Service Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 2007
- In Re W.R. Grace & Co.United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Delaware · 2006
- The Keene Group, Inc. v. City of Cincinnati, OhioCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2021
- Board of County Commissioners v. Park County Sportsmen's Ranch, LLPSupreme Court of Colorado · 2002
49 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.