Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
State and Local Government Law Commons™
Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Natural Resources Law (871)
- Administrative Law (870)
- Oil, Gas, and Mineral Law (870)
- Constitutional Law (18)
- Courts (12)
-
- Criminal Law (11)
- Environmental Law (8)
- Fourteenth Amendment (8)
- Health Law and Policy (8)
- Legislation (8)
- Property Law and Real Estate (7)
- Civil Procedure (6)
- Family Law (6)
- Litigation (5)
- Supreme Court of the United States (5)
- Water Law (5)
- Energy and Utilities Law (4)
- Jurisdiction (4)
- Juvenile Law (4)
- Social and Behavioral Sciences (4)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (3)
- Conflict of Laws (3)
- Criminal Procedure (3)
- Evidence (3)
- Labor and Employment Law (3)
- Land Use Law (3)
- Law Enforcement and Corrections (3)
- Medical Jurisprudence (3)
- Institution
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Ohio Oil & Gas Commission Decisions (867)
- Cleveland State Law Review (38)
- Michigan Law Review (20)
- Journal of Law and Health (6)
- Articles (3)
-
- Et Cetera (3)
- University of Cincinnati Law Review (3)
- Chicago-Kent Law Review (2)
- Michigan Journal of Environmental & Administrative Law (2)
- Con Law Center Amicus Briefs (1)
- Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present) (1)
- Faculty Publications (1)
- Fracking, Water Quality and Public Health: Examining Current Laws and Regulations (March 20) (1)
- IUSTITIA (1)
- Indiana Law Journal (1)
- Law Faculty Reports and Comments (1)
- Scholarly Works (1)
- Shale Plays in the Intermountain West: Legal and Policy Issues (November 12) (1)
- St. Mary's Law Journal (1)
- Touro Law Review (1)
- Publication Type
Articles 361 - 390 of 955
Full-Text Articles in State and Local Government Law
Appeal No. 0734: Chieftain Energy Corp. V. Division Of Mineral Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission
Appeal No. 0734: Chieftain Energy Corp. V. Division Of Mineral Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission
Ohio Oil & Gas Commission Decisions
Chief's Order 2004-29
Appeal No. 0735: Chieftain Energy Corp. V. Division Of Mineral Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission
Appeal No. 0735: Chieftain Energy Corp. V. Division Of Mineral Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission
Ohio Oil & Gas Commission Decisions
Chief's Order 2004-37
Appeal No. 0736: Energy Development Corp. V. Division Of Mineral Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission
Appeal No. 0736: Energy Development Corp. V. Division Of Mineral Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission
Ohio Oil & Gas Commission Decisions
Chief's Order 2004-42
Appeal No. 0737: Gemini Energy, Inc. V. Division Of Mineral Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission
Appeal No. 0737: Gemini Energy, Inc. V. Division Of Mineral Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission
Ohio Oil & Gas Commission Decisions
Chief's Order 2004-38
Appeal No. 0740: Francis Smith, Dba Ridgeway Resources V. Division Of Mineral Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission
Appeal No. 0740: Francis Smith, Dba Ridgeway Resources V. Division Of Mineral Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission
Ohio Oil & Gas Commission Decisions
Chief's Order 2004-27 and Chief's Order 2004-55
Community Redevelopment, Public Use, And Eminent Domain, Patricia E. Salkin, Lora A. Lucero
Community Redevelopment, Public Use, And Eminent Domain, Patricia E. Salkin, Lora A. Lucero
Scholarly Works
Published just weeks before the U.S. Supreme Court handed down their controversial decision on Kelo v. City of New London in 2005, this article, in correctly predicting the outcome of the Supreme Court opinion, explores in Section I how the concept of what constitutes a public use has evolved over the decades from traditionally accepted uses such as public roads, buildings (e.g., government buildings and schools), and utilities to urban redevelopment. It explains how the broad concepts of community redevelopment have been stretched to encompass needed economic development projects that promise jobs, tax revenue, and other public benefits similar to …
Appeal No. 0716: Ohio Casualty Group V. Division Of Mineral Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission
Appeal No. 0716: Ohio Casualty Group V. Division Of Mineral Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission
Ohio Oil & Gas Commission Decisions
Chief's Order 2003-15
Appeal No. 0733: Chieftain Energy Corp. V. Division Of Mineral Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission
Appeal No. 0733: Chieftain Energy Corp. V. Division Of Mineral Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission
Ohio Oil & Gas Commission Decisions
Chief's Order 2004-40
Appeal No. 0738: Lori & Alvin Perry V. Division Of Mineral Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission
Appeal No. 0738: Lori & Alvin Perry V. Division Of Mineral Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission
Ohio Oil & Gas Commission Decisions
Chief's Order 2004-43 (Mandatory Pooling Order)
Appeal No. 0721: Eric Heinselman V. Division Of Mineral Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission
Appeal No. 0721: Eric Heinselman V. Division Of Mineral Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission
Ohio Oil & Gas Commission Decisions
Chief's Order 2003-54
Appeal No. 0731: Brian Mccort V. Division Of Mineral Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission
Appeal No. 0731: Brian Mccort V. Division Of Mineral Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission
Ohio Oil & Gas Commission Decisions
Chief's Order 2003-96
Appeal No. 0730: L.B.J. Drilling Co. V. Division Of Mineral Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission
Appeal No. 0730: L.B.J. Drilling Co. V. Division Of Mineral Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission
Ohio Oil & Gas Commission Decisions
Chief's Order 2003-90
Appeal No. 0719: Poston Operating Co., Inc. V. Division Of Mineral Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission
Appeal No. 0719: Poston Operating Co., Inc. V. Division Of Mineral Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission
Ohio Oil & Gas Commission Decisions
Chief's Order 2003-26 and Chief's Order 2003-47
Appeal No. 0713: Gemini Energy, Inc. V. Division Of Mineral Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission
Appeal No. 0713: Gemini Energy, Inc. V. Division Of Mineral Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission
Ohio Oil & Gas Commission Decisions
Chief's Order 2002-67
Appeal No. 0728: Robert W. Barr, Dba Big Sky Petroleum V. Division Of Mineral Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission
Appeal No. 0728: Robert W. Barr, Dba Big Sky Petroleum V. Division Of Mineral Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission
Ohio Oil & Gas Commission Decisions
Chief's Order 2003-69
Appeal No. 0718: Poston Operating Co., Inc. V. Division Of Mineral Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission
Appeal No. 0718: Poston Operating Co., Inc. V. Division Of Mineral Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission
Ohio Oil & Gas Commission Decisions
Chief's Order 2003-26 and Chief's Order 2003-47
Appeal No. 0725: Georgetown Oil Co., Inc. V. Division Of Mineral Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission
Appeal No. 0725: Georgetown Oil Co., Inc. V. Division Of Mineral Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission
Ohio Oil & Gas Commission Decisions
Chief's Order 2003-62
The Failure Of Ohio's Drug Treatment Initiative, Tamara Karel
The Failure Of Ohio's Drug Treatment Initiative, Tamara Karel
Cleveland State Law Review
In the summer of 2002, proponents of Issue 1 "The Ohio Drug Treatment Initiative," (hereafter referred to as the Initiative) succeeded in getting the proposal on the November ballot. The Initiative proposed an amendment to the Ohio Constitution that would have required courts to approve requests for treatment when made by eligible nonviolent drug offenders. The Amendment sought to (1) allocate a fixed amount of the state's General Revenue Fund to pay for the opening and operating of new treatment centers, (2) limit prison sentences for users and possessors to ninety days, and (3) provide for the sealing and expungement …
The New Judicial Federalism In Ohio: The First Decade , Robert F. Williams
The New Judicial Federalism In Ohio: The First Decade , Robert F. Williams
Cleveland State Law Review
There are a number of tentative conclusions that may be reached based on this selective analysis of the Ohio Supreme Court's first decade of experience with the New Judicial Federalism. First, the court is to be commended for taking the first steps toward recognizing the Ohio Constitution as a document of independent political and legal force. The Arnold decision, together with the others discussed in this article, serve to alert the lower bench, the bar, the media, and students and professors to the potential contained within state constitutions. Next, to the extent that there is inconsistency to be detected in …
Turn Down The Volume: The Constitutionality Of Ohio's Municipal Ordinances Regulating Sound From Car Stereo Systems, Stuart A. Laven
Turn Down The Volume: The Constitutionality Of Ohio's Municipal Ordinances Regulating Sound From Car Stereo Systems, Stuart A. Laven
Cleveland State Law Review
This article will examine municipal ordinances criminalizing the emission of sound from car stereo systems in excess of proscribed limits, including the methods adopted to measure offending sound and the penalties imposed for violations, the Ohio (and certain non-Ohio) cases which have challenged the constitutionality of such ordinances, and certain constitutional aspects of such ordinances and their enforcement which have yet to be addressed.
Separation Of Powers In Ohio: A Critical Analysis, Curtis Rodebush
Separation Of Powers In Ohio: A Critical Analysis, Curtis Rodebush
Cleveland State Law Review
The goal of this Article is to provide a basic framework from which to begin a separation of powers analysis under the Ohio Constitution. In addition, this Article offers some insights into how a separation of powers controversy should be dissected and suggests some directions that Ohio courts should take in the future. Part I of this Article presents useful background information on the separation of powers doctrine, including its origin, its treatment in the Ohio Constitution, predominant theories of analysis, and relevant Ohio cases. Part II (A) hypothesizes a general approach with which to begin a separation of powers …
Of Disunity And Logrolling: Ohio's One-Subject Rule And The Very Evils It Was Designed To Prevent, Stephanie Hoffer, Travis Mcdade
Of Disunity And Logrolling: Ohio's One-Subject Rule And The Very Evils It Was Designed To Prevent, Stephanie Hoffer, Travis Mcdade
Cleveland State Law Review
This article looks at the one-subject rule's history and significant jurisprudence with particular note of any rules that can be determined. Next, we address the court's use of the rule in the controversial case of State ex rel. Ohio Academy of Trial Lawyers v. Sheward. Finally, we look at Amended Substitute Senate Bill No. 281-recently passed by the Ohio General Assembly-to determine if it will pass one-subject muster under recent jurisprudence.
Constitutional Common School, Molly O'Brien, Amanda Woodrum
Constitutional Common School, Molly O'Brien, Amanda Woodrum
Cleveland State Law Review
In this paper we turn to historical evidence as a beginning point for understanding the constitutional vision and values of the "thorough and efficient system of common schools" mandated by Article VI, Section 2 of the Ohio Constitution. In Part II, we consider the early development of public schooling in America and the complex relationship between public education and religion. The inclusion of the educational provisions in the Constitution of 1851 represented a victory for the advocates of a non-sectarian, state operated system of schools that would encourage civic participation and avoid religious indoctrination In Part II, we address efforts …
School Voucher Programs: Has The Supreme Court Pulled Up The Gangplank To Establishment Clause Challenges., Cecil C. Kuhne Iii
School Voucher Programs: Has The Supreme Court Pulled Up The Gangplank To Establishment Clause Challenges., Cecil C. Kuhne Iii
St. Mary's Law Journal
The Establishment Clause is not violated when a program is neutral toward religion and provides assistance directly to a broad class of citizens, who in turn voluntarily direct the aid to religious schools. A program containing these features permits government aid to reach religious institutions only thru the deliberate choices of individuals. Any incidental advancement or endorsement of religion is attributable to the individual recipient—not the government, which simply acts as a disburser. In Zelman v. Simmons-Harris, the Supreme Court reiterated this rationale from a twenty-year line of cases. Zelman is a death knell for Establishment Clause challenges to carefully …
Appeal No. 0729: Christopher Nieset V. Division Of Mineral Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission
Appeal No. 0729: Christopher Nieset V. Division Of Mineral Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission
Ohio Oil & Gas Commission Decisions
Chief's Order 2003-85
Appeal No. 0714: Gary Harris & Group Maintenance V. Division Of Mineral Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission
Appeal No. 0714: Gary Harris & Group Maintenance V. Division Of Mineral Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission
Ohio Oil & Gas Commission Decisions
Chief's Order 2003-11
Appeal No. 0723: Carmen A. Didomenico V. Division Of Mineral Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission
Appeal No. 0723: Carmen A. Didomenico V. Division Of Mineral Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission
Ohio Oil & Gas Commission Decisions
Chief's Order 2003-54
Appeal No. 0720: Bernard Busson V. Division Of Mineral Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission
Appeal No. 0720: Bernard Busson V. Division Of Mineral Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission
Ohio Oil & Gas Commission Decisions
Chief's Approval of a Variance Request; Mandatory Pooling (Ohio Valley Energy Systems)
Appeal No. 0724: Michael Malvasi V. Division Of Mineral Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission
Appeal No. 0724: Michael Malvasi V. Division Of Mineral Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission
Ohio Oil & Gas Commission Decisions
Chief's Order 2003-54
Appeal No. 0726: Bernard Busson V. Division Of Mineral Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission
Appeal No. 0726: Bernard Busson V. Division Of Mineral Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission
Ohio Oil & Gas Commission Decisions
Chief's Issuance of API Well No. 34-153-2-2930-00-00