After failing to comply with its order on remand, the Ohio Supreme Court reversed an Eleventh District Court of Appeals’ ruling, which failed to follow the high court’s instructions to weigh the parties’ evidence in deciding whether the state’s suspension of operations at a private company’s salt-water-injection well constituted a total or partial government taking of property.

The court further concluded that the appellate court violated law-of-the-case doctrine by deciding that the company lacked a cognizable property interest in its leasehold right to operate a saltwater-injection well, despite the state high court previously deciding that a leasehold interest was established.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]