§Why CasetextPricing

Cooperstown Holstein Corporation, Appellant,v.Town of Middlefield, Respondent.

Brief

92 Cited authorities

  1. New York State Club Assn. v. New York City

    487 U.S. 1 (1988)   Cited 568 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "the second kind of facial challenge will not succeed unless the statute is `substantially' overbroad, which requires the court to find `a realistic danger that the statute itself will significantly compromise recognized First Amendment protections of parties not before the Court'" (quoting Members of the City Council of Los Angeles v. Taxpayers for Vincent, 466 U.S. 789, 801, 104 S.Ct. 2118, 2126, 80 L.Ed.2d 772 (1984))

  2. Zahra v. Town of Southold

    48 F.3d 674 (2d Cir. 1995)   Cited 1,056 times
    Holding that plaintiffs asserting a municipal liability claim under § 1983 must prove, inter alia, the denial of a constitutional right

  3. Euclid v. Ambler Co.

    272 U.S. 365 (1926)   Cited 2,413 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a zoning ordinance that "greatly ... reduce[d] the value of appellee's lands and destroy[ed] their marketability for industrial, commercial and residential uses" constituted a "present invasion of appellee's property rights"

  4. Commonwealth Edison Co. v. Montana

    453 U.S. 609 (1981)   Cited 290 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a severance tax imposed on amount of coal mined was a "general revenue tax"

  5. Riley v. County of Broome

    95 N.Y.2d 455 (N.Y. 2000)   Cited 390 times
    Holding that the legislative history of Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1103 evinces an intent to impose “a minimum standard of care” on operators of vehicles engaged in roadwork

  6. People v. Applied Card

    2008 N.Y. Slip Op. 5780 (N.Y. 2008)   Cited 202 times
    Holding that, when determining whether to apply res judicata to non-parties, courts “must determine whether the severe consequences of preclusion flowing from a finding of privity strike a fair result under the circumstances”

  7. Gernatt Asphalt v. Sardinia

    87 N.Y.2d 668 (N.Y. 1996)   Cited 266 times   4 Legal Analyses
    In Gernatt —decided after the legislature had codified Frew Run's holding in an amendment to the MLRL's supersession clause—the Town of Sardinia amended its zoning ordinance to eliminate all mining as a permitted use throughout the town.

  8. Balbuena v. IDR Realty LLC

    2006 N.Y. Slip Op. 1248 (N.Y. 2006)   Cited 142 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "plaintiffs' status as aliens who are not legally authorized to work in the United States" did not preclude their recovery of lost earning in their suit to recover for injuries sustained as a result of defendants' purported violations of state Labor Law

  9. Innophos v. Rhodia

    2008 N.Y. Slip Op. 1253 (N.Y. 2008)   Cited 116 times
    Rejecting the defendants' argument that the water fees were not indemnifiable because they were not in the nature of taxes

  10. Consolidated Edison Co. of New York, Inc. v. Town of Red Hook

    60 N.Y.2d 99 (N.Y. 1983)   Cited 177 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding state had preempted local regulation regarding the siting of major steam electric-generating plants

  11. Section 1509.02 - Division of oil and gas resources management; chief; oil and gas well fund

    Ohio Rev. Code § 1509.02   Cited 18 times   2 Legal Analyses

    There is hereby created in the department of natural resources the division of oil and gas resources management, which shall be administered by the chief of the division of oil and gas resources management. The division has sole and exclusive authority to regulate the permitting, location, and spacing of oil and gas wells and production operations within the state, excepting only those activities regulated under federal laws for which oversight has been delegated to the environmental protection agency

  12. Section 34-60-102 - Legislative declaration

    Colo. Rev. Stat. § 34-60-102   Cited 14 times   3 Legal Analyses

    (1) (a) It is declared to be in the public interest and the commission is directed to: (I) Regulate the development and production of the natural resources of oil and gas in the state of Colorado in a manner that protects public health, safety, and welfare, including protection of the environment and wildlife resources; (II) Protect the public and private interests against waste in the production and utilization of oil and gas; (III) Safeguard, protect, and enforce the coequal and correlative rights

  13. Section 30:28 - Drilling permits; issuance; fees; location plat; notice and hearing; funds from drilling permit fees

    La. Stat. tit. 30 § 28   Cited 2 times   1 Legal Analyses

    A. No well or test well may be drilled in search of minerals without first obtaining a permit from the commissioner of conservation, and the commissioner shall collect for each such well or test well a drilling permit fee. The commissioner shall periodically review the fees collected by his office for drilling permits and may revise such fees pursuant to the rulemaking provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act. B. (1) A six-month permit shall be valid for one hundred eighty days from the date

  14. Section 422.1 - General provisions

    N.Y. Comp. Codes R. & Regs. tit. 6 § 422.1   Cited 1 times

    (a) Every applicant for a mining permit shall submit to the department a mined land-use plan which shall set forth in detail an outline of the mining property and the affected land, the applicant's mining plan and the applicant's reclamation plan. After the department has issued a mining permit, the permittee shall not deviate or depart from the mined land-use plan without approval by the department of an alteration or amendment thereto. (b) The applicant's mining and reclamation plans shall describe