Search for: "Waters v. State" Results 41 - 60 of 10,792
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
14 May 2014, 6:04 am by Matthew L.M. Fletcher
Here are the new materials in Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians v. [read post]
14 Jun 2013, 3:30 am by propertyprof
The petitioner in this case, a Texas state agency responsible for providing water to north-central Texas, sought a water resource... [read post]
21 Mar 2012, 4:53 pm
EPA; Victory for Due Process and a Check on the Clean Water Act By R Tamara de Silva March 21, 2012 Today the United States Supreme Court ruled unanimously in Sackett v. [read post]
28 Apr 2009, 11:48 pm
The stated purpose of the CWRA is to "restore" the authority of the EPA under the Clean Water Act and roll back the clock to the state of the law prior to the U.S. [read post]
9 Apr 2014, 5:25 pm by Jeff Gittins
In 2011, the Utah Supreme Court issued its opinion in the Jensen v. [read post]
20 Jan 2011, 4:36 pm
  Its initial opinion, read:  "The record reflects Regional Board's basin plan also took into considered 'potential' beneficial uses of water in setting water quality objectives. [read post]
25 Feb 2012, 4:42 pm by Barry Barnett
The Court ruled, 9-0, that limiting landowners' right to use ground-water amounted to a "taking", for which the state owed compensation. [read post]
18 Sep 2010, 10:31 am by John McFarland
The suit, Mesa Water, L.P. and G&J Ranch, Inc. v. [read post]
21 Jan 2018, 9:00 am
The Rule defines the statutory term “waters of the United States” in the Clean Water Act, and has been subject to appeals in both federal district courts and courts of appeals. [read post]
7 Sep 2015, 5:56 pm by Daily Record Staff
Criminal procedure — Hearsay — Victim’s statements to police On May 6, 2014, following a one-day bench trial in the Circuit Court for Talbot County, the court found Adrian Kmar Waters, appellant, guilty on three counts of second degree assault related to incidents on April 22, 2013, and May 29, 2013, both involving the same ... [read post]
16 Jun 2021, 7:35 pm by Patricia Salkin
The state law defines that the lake is among the “navigable waters of the state” and the Town is not authorized to navigate activities on state-owned navigable waters. [read post]