Court sides with Wyoming in dispute with Montana
Court Alerts
The Supreme Court says Wyoming is not taking too much water from a river system it shares with Montana.
The high court on Monday turned away Montana's complaint that Wyoming is taking too much water from the Tongue and Powder rivers in violation of a 1950 agreement between the states.
Montana claimed that more efficient irrigation in Wyoming is preventing runoff from rejoining the river and flowing downstream.
Justice Clarence Thomas wrote the 7-1 decision, which says more efficient irrigation is permissible to the detriment of downstream users. Justice Antonin Scalia was the only dissenting vote.
Justice Elena Kagan did not participate in the case because she worked on it while in the solicitor general's office.
Related listings
-
Pierre contract dispute goes before high court
Court Alerts 04/29/2011The South Dakota Supreme Court has heard arguments in a dispute between Pierre and the union representing a majority of city workers. The city a year ago imposed its final salary offer of a 1 percent raise for all employees and another 1 percent for ...
-
Conn. high court hears death penalty appeal
Court Alerts 04/28/2011A lawyer told the state Supreme Court yesterday that his client’s death penalty case was the weakest one ever to go before the high court, alleging that the jury was biased and that key evidence was improperly withheld from the trial. Justices heard ...
-
Court close to seating Blagojevich jury
Court Alerts 04/28/2011Jury selection in the retrial of former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich is entering the home stretch after dragging on for longer than expected. Thursday should be the last day of questioning of would-be jurors by U.S. District Judge James Zagel. He to...
Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC
A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party
Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party
However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.