green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 2×
6.7 score
“congress vested the aec (now nrc) with the authority to resolve the proper balance between desired industrial progress and adequate health and safety standards.”
Treatment trajectory · 1972 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1972
1999
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 15 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Consolidated Rail Corporation v. Interstate Commerce Commission
congress vested the aec (now nrc) with the authority to resolve the proper balance between desired industrial progress and adequate health and safety standards.
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Consolidated Rail Corp. v. Interstate Commerce Commission
congress vested the aec with the authority to resolve the proper balance between desired industrial progress and adequate health and safety standards.
cited
Cited "see"
Crawford v. National Lead Co.
See Northern States Power Co. v. Minnesota, 447 F.2d 1143 (8th Cir.1971), aff'd, 405 U.S. 1035 , 92 S.Ct. 1307 , 31 L.Ed.2d 576 (1972).
discussed
Cited "see"
Commonwealth v. Capitolo
(2×)
See Northern States Power Company v. State of Minnesota, 447 F.2d 1143 (8th Cir.1971), aff’d mem. 405 U.S. 1035 , 92 S.Ct. 1307 , 31 L.Ed.2d 576 (1972).
discussed
Cited "see"
People of the State of Illinois v. Kerr-Mcgee Chemical Corporation, and City of West Chicago, a Municipal Corporation v. Kerr-Mcgee Chemical Corporation, a Delaware Corporation
See Northern States Power Co. v. Minnesota, 447 F.2d 1143, 1146-47 (8th Cir. 1971), aff'd, 405 U.S. 1035 , 92 S.Ct. 1307 , 31 L.Ed.2d 576 (1972). 14 With these factors in mind, we turn to an examination of the Atomic Energy Act, 42 U.S.C. § 2011 et seq., and the extent to which it has preempted state and local law.
discussed
Cited "see"
People of Illinois v. Kerr-McGee Chemical Corp.
(2×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
See Northern States Power Co. v. Minnesota, 447 F.2d 1143, 1146-47 (8th Cir. 1971), aff’d, 405 U.S. 1035 , 92 S.Ct. 1307 , 31 L.Ed.2d 576 (1972). 14 With these factors in mind, we turn to an examination of the Atomic Energy Act, 42 U.S.C. § 2011 et seq., and the extent to which it has preempted state and local law.
cited
Cited "see"
UNC Resources, Inc. v. Benally
See Northern States Power Co. v. Minnesota, 447 F.2d 1143 (8th Cir. 1971), aff’d, 405 U.S. 1035 , 92 S.Ct. 1307 , 31 L.Ed.2d 576 (1972).
discussed
Cited "see"
Kelly v. Carr
See Northern States Power Co. v. Minnesota, 447 F.2d 1143 (8th Cir. 1971), aff’d 405 U.S. 1035 , 92 S.Ct. 1307 , 31 L.Ed.2d 576 (1972), where the court stated: key factors in the determination of whether Congress has, by implication, preempted a particular area so as to preclude state attempts at dual regulation include, inter alia: (1) the aim and intent of Congress as revealed by the statute itself and its legislative history; (2) the pervasiveness of the federal regulatory scheme as authorized and directed by the legislation and as carried into effect by the federal administrative agency;…
cited
Cited "see"
Los Alamos School Board v. Wugalter
See Northern States Power Co. v. Minnesota, 8 Cir., 447 F.2d 1143, 1146 , aff'd, 405 U.S. 1035 , 92 S.Ct. 1307 , 31 L.Ed.2d 576 .
cited
Cited "see"
Los Alamos School Board v. Wugalter
See Northern States Power Co. v. Minnesota, 8 Cir., 447 F.2d 1143, 1146 , aff’d, 405 U.S. 1035 , 92 S.Ct. 1307 , 31 L.Ed.2d 576 .
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Jersey Central Power & Light Co.
See Northern States Power Co. v. Minnesota, 447 F. 2d 1143 (8 Cir.1971), aff'd 405 U.S. 1035 , 92 S.Ct. 1307 , 31 L.Ed.2d 576 (1972).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Kahan
See People v. Krivda, 5 Cal.3d 357 , 96 Cal.Rptr. 62 , 486 P.2d 1262, 1267-1269 (1971), cert. granted, 405 U.S. 1039 , 92 S.Ct. 1307 , 31 L.Ed.2d 579 (1972). *797 Moreover, in this case, there is and can be no claim by the government that Mr. Kahan’s wastebasket was “abandoned” by him when he left his office in the evening after work.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Burton v. Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc.
The court subsequently reiterated that “the [federal [g]ovemment maintains complete control of the safety and ‘nuclear’ aspects of energy generation . . . .” Id., 212 ; see also id., 212 n.24, citing Northern States Power Co. v. Minnesota, 447 F.2d 1143, 1151 (8th Cir. 1971) (federal government has sole authority to regulate radioactive waste release from nuclear power plants to exclusion of states), aff'd mem., 405 U.S. 1035 , 92 S. Ct. 1307 , 31 L.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Brown v. Kerr-Mcgee Chemical Corporation
See, e.g., Northern States Power Co. v. Minnesota, 447 F.2d 1143, 1149-54 (8th Cir.1971) (radiation hazards), aff'd 405 U.S. 1035 , 92 S.Ct. 1307 , 31 L.Ed.2d 576 (1972); Marshall v. Consumers Power Co., 65 Mich.App. 237, 247 , 237 N.W.2d 266 (1976) (nonradiation hazards).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Brown v. Kerr-McGee Chemical Corp.
See, e.g., Northern States Power Co. v. Minnesota, 447 F.2d 1143, 1149-54 (8th Cir.1971) (radiation hazards), aff 'd 405 U.S. 1035 , 92 S.Ct. 1307 , 31 L.Ed.2d 576 (1972); Marshall v. Consumers Power Co., 65 Mich.App. 237, 247 , 237 N.W.2d 266 (1976) (nonradiation hazards).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Lake Shore Auto Parts Co.
v.
Korzen
v.
Korzen
No. 71-674.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Apr 3, 1972.
Published
Citer courts: D.C. Circuit (2)
Appeal from Sup. Ct. Ill. dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari denied.