Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 17 of 17

Full-Text Articles in Law

Appeal No. 0816: Ohio Valley Energy Systems V. Division Of Oil & Gas Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission Dec 2009

Appeal No. 0816: Ohio Valley Energy Systems V. Division Of Oil & Gas Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission

Ohio Oil & Gas Commission Decisions

Chief's Order 2009-46


Appeal No. 0796: Ava Gas Corporation V. Division Of Mineral Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission Oct 2009

Appeal No. 0796: Ava Gas Corporation V. Division Of Mineral Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission

Ohio Oil & Gas Commission Decisions

Chief's Order 2008-04


Appeal No. 0812: City Of Munroe Falls, Ohio V. Division Of Oil & Gas Resources Management And D & L Energy, Inc., Ohio Oil & Gas Commission Aug 2009

Appeal No. 0812: City Of Munroe Falls, Ohio V. Division Of Oil & Gas Resources Management And D & L Energy, Inc., Ohio Oil & Gas Commission

Ohio Oil & Gas Commission Decisions

Chief's Decision Granting Permit (D&L Energy, Inc.)


Appeal No. 0800: Edward H. Everett Co. V. Division Of Oil & Gas Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission Jun 2009

Appeal No. 0800: Edward H. Everett Co. V. Division Of Oil & Gas Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission

Ohio Oil & Gas Commission Decisions

Chief's Order 2008-55


Appeal No. 0811: Lawrence & Shalynew Fox V. Division Of Oil & Gas Resources Management And Everflow Eastern Partners, L.P., Ohio Oil & Gas Commission Jun 2009

Appeal No. 0811: Lawrence & Shalynew Fox V. Division Of Oil & Gas Resources Management And Everflow Eastern Partners, L.P., Ohio Oil & Gas Commission

Ohio Oil & Gas Commission Decisions

Chief's Order 2008-91 (Everflow Eastern Partners, L.P.)


Appeal No. 0810: Maverick Oil & Gas, Inc. V. Division Of Oil & Gas Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission May 2009

Appeal No. 0810: Maverick Oil & Gas, Inc. V. Division Of Oil & Gas Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission

Ohio Oil & Gas Commission Decisions

Chief's Order 2008-88


Appeal No. 0799: Adams Oil & Gas V. Division Of Mineral Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission May 2009

Appeal No. 0799: Adams Oil & Gas V. Division Of Mineral Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission

Ohio Oil & Gas Commission Decisions

Chief's Orders 2008-42 and 2008-43


Appeal No. 0798: Adams Oil & Gas V. Division Of Mineral Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission May 2009

Appeal No. 0798: Adams Oil & Gas V. Division Of Mineral Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission

Ohio Oil & Gas Commission Decisions

Chief's Orders 2008-42 and 2008-43


Appeal No. 0803: Edward H. Everett Co. V. Division Of Oil & Gas Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission May 2009

Appeal No. 0803: Edward H. Everett Co. V. Division Of Oil & Gas Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission

Ohio Oil & Gas Commission Decisions

Chief's Order 2008-56, 2008-57 & 2008-58


Appeal No. 0801: Edward H. Everett Co. V. Division Of Oil & Gas Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission May 2009

Appeal No. 0801: Edward H. Everett Co. V. Division Of Oil & Gas Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission

Ohio Oil & Gas Commission Decisions

Chief's Order 2008-56, 2008-57 & 2008-58


Appeal No. 0802: Edward H. Everett Co. V. Division Of Oil & Gas Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission May 2009

Appeal No. 0802: Edward H. Everett Co. V. Division Of Oil & Gas Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission

Ohio Oil & Gas Commission Decisions

Chief's Order 2008-56, 2008-57 & 2008-58


Appeal No. 0808: Beck Energy Corp. V. Division Of Oil & Gas Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission Jan 2009

Appeal No. 0808: Beck Energy Corp. V. Division Of Oil & Gas Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission

Ohio Oil & Gas Commission Decisions

Chief's Order 2008-74, 2008-75, 2008-81, 2008-82 & 2008-83


Appeal No. 0809: Beck Energy Corp. V. Division Of Oil & Gas Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission Jan 2009

Appeal No. 0809: Beck Energy Corp. V. Division Of Oil & Gas Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission

Ohio Oil & Gas Commission Decisions

Chief's Order 2008-74, 2008-75, 2008-81, 2008-82 & 2008-83


Appeal No. 0807: Beck Energy Corp. V. Division Of Oil & Gas Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission Jan 2009

Appeal No. 0807: Beck Energy Corp. V. Division Of Oil & Gas Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission

Ohio Oil & Gas Commission Decisions

Chief's Order 2008-74, 2008-75, 2008-81, 2008-82 & 2008-83


Appeal No. 0806: Beck Energy Corp. V. Division Of Oil & Gas Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission Jan 2009

Appeal No. 0806: Beck Energy Corp. V. Division Of Oil & Gas Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission

Ohio Oil & Gas Commission Decisions

Chief's Order 2008-74, 2008-75, 2008-81, 2008-82 & 2008-83


Appeal No. 0805: Beck Energy Corp. V. Division Of Oil & Gas Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission Jan 2009

Appeal No. 0805: Beck Energy Corp. V. Division Of Oil & Gas Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission

Ohio Oil & Gas Commission Decisions

Chief's Order 2008-74, 2008-75, 2008-81, 2008-82 & 2008-83


The Rest Is Silence: Chevron Deference, Agency Jurisdiction And Statutory Silences, Jonathan H. Adler Jan 2009

The Rest Is Silence: Chevron Deference, Agency Jurisdiction And Statutory Silences, Jonathan H. Adler

Faculty Publications

Should agencies receive Chevron deference when interpreting the reach of their own jurisdiction? This article argues that, in general, they should not. We begin by identifying and detailing the various different types of jurisdictional questions that may arise in statutory interpretation. The article then surveys how the Supreme Court and lower federal courts have analyzed these different aspects of the jurisdiction problem, with a particular attention to statutory silences. The Court's Chevron jurisprudence strongly suggest that deference to agency determinations of their own jurisdiction should be disfavored, particularly where a statute is silent (and not merely ambiguous) about the ...