green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
4.5 score
“the ere delivery of 132 waste for storage at a facility that is licensed to store waste is not a discharge of pollutants into the environment.”
Treatment trajectory · 1992 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1992
2009
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 13 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Nestlé Foods Corp. v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.
the ere delivery of 132 waste for storage at a facility that is licensed to store waste is not a discharge of pollutants into the environment.
discussed
Cited "see"
Manufactured Housing Communities v. State
See Presbytery of Seattle v. King County, 114 Wn.2d 320, 329-30 , 787 P.2d 907 (“court[s] should ask whether the regulation destroys one or more of the fundamental attributes of ownership”), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 911 , 111 S. Ct. 284 , 112 L.
discussed
Cited "see"
Manufactured Housing Communities v. State
See Presbytery of Seattle v. King County, 114 Wash.2d 320, 329-30 , 787 P.2d 907 ("court[s] should ask whether the regulation destroys one or more of the fundamental attributes of ownership"), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 911 , 111 S.Ct. 284 , 112 L.Ed.2d 238 (1990); Sintra, Inc. v. City of Seattle, 119 Wash.2d 1 , 14 n. 6, 829 P.2d 765 ("regulation may also be a taking if it destroys one or more of the fundamental attributes of property ownership"), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 1028 , 113 S.Ct. 676 , 121 L.Ed.2d 598 (1992); Robinson v. City of Seattle, 119 Wash.2d 34, 50 , 830 P.2d 318 ("we ask whether t…
discussed
Cited "see"
Phillips v. King County
(2×)
See Presbytery of Seattle v. King County, 114 Wash.2d 320, 339 , 787 P.2d 907 , cert. denied, 498 U.S. 911 , 111 S.Ct. 284 , 112 L.Ed.2d 238 (1990) (dismissing as not ripe the claim of a landowner who failed to seek permits before challenging regulatory action); Estate of Friedman v. Pierce County, 112 Wash.2d 68, 80 , 768 P.2d 462 (1989) (affirming dismissal of action for failure to pursue administrative remedy).
cited
Cited "see"
Sparks v. Douglas County
See Presbytery of Seattle v. King County, 114 Wash.2d 320, 336-37 , 787 P.2d 907 , cert. denied, 498 U.S. 911 , 111 S.Ct. 284 , 112 L.Ed.2d 238 (1990).
cited
Cited "see"
Sparks v. Douglas County
See Presbytery of Seattle v. King County, 114 Wn.2d 320, 336-37 , 787 P.2d 907 , cert. denied, 498 U.S. 911 (1990).
cited
Cited "see"
People v. Williams
See People v. Hooper (1989), 133 Ill. 2d 469, 509-10 , 552 N.E.2d 684, 701 , cert. denied (1990), 498 U.S. 911 , 112 L.
discussed
Cited "see"
Department of Transp. v. Weisenfeld
See generally the due process argument contained in the First English dissent. [1] Williamson County Regional Planning Com'n v. Hamilton Bank of Johnson City, 473 U.S. 172 , 105 S.Ct. 3108 , 87 L.Ed.2d 126 (1985). [2] See also Strong, On Placing Property Due Process Center Stage in Takings Jurisprudence, 49 Ohio St.L.J. 591, 592 (1988). [3] See, e.g., Presbytery of Seattle v. King County, 114 Wash.2d 320 , 787 P.2d 907 , cert. denied, 498 U.S. 911 , 111 S.Ct. 284 , 112 L.Ed.2d 238 (1990), where the Washington Supreme Court observed: If a regulation is not aimed at a legitimate public purpose, …
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Sintra, Inc. v. City of Seattle
See also Presbytery of Seattle v. King County, 114 Wash.2d 320 , 787 P.2d 907 , cert. denied, 498 U.S. 911 , 111 S.Ct. 284 , 112 L.Ed.2d 238 (1990).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Sintra, Inc. v. City of Seattle
See also Presbytery of Seattle v. King County, 114 Wn.2d 320 , 787 P.2d 907 , cert. denied, 498 U.S. 911 (1990).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Harrow Products, Inc. v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company
See also FL Aerospace v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co., 897 F.2d 214 (6th Cir.1990), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 911 , 111 S.Ct. 284 , 112 L.Ed.2d 238 (1990); U.S. Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Murray Ohio Mfg.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Harrow Products, Inc. v. Liberty Mutual Insurance
See also FL Aerospace v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co., 897 F.2d 214 (6th Cir.1990), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 911 , 111 S.Ct. 284 , 112 L.Ed.2d 238 (1990); U.S. Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Murray Ohio Mfg.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Rivett v. City of Tacoma
See Clerk’s Papers, at 55-57. 6 Clerk’s Papers, at 5-7. 7 Supplemental Clerk’s Papers, at 7-8. 8 Clerk’s Papers, at 8-9. 9 The two orders are substantially similar except that (1) the order dated January 10, 1992 was not signed by Ms. Helen Rivett’s representative, but the order dated January 24,1992 was; and (2) the order dated January 10,1992 did not dismiss the City’s cross-claim with prejudice, but the order dated January 24, 1992 did. 10 Court’s oral ruling, Partial Verbatim Report of Proceedings, at 2-3; order granting defendant Gundermanns’ motion for summary judgment; C…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
MCI Communications Corp.
v.
United States
v.
United States
No. 90-9.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 9, 1990.
498 U.S. 911
C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.
Justice O’Connor took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.*