Court sides with Wyoming in dispute with Montana

Recent Cases

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

  • Court close to seating Blagojevich jury

    Court close to seating Blagojevich jury

    Recent Cases 04/28/2011

    Jury 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...

  • Court denies Va. inmate's lawsuit over beard

    Court denies Va. inmate's lawsuit over beard

    Recent Cases 04/23/2011

    A federal court has denied a Muslim inmate's lawsuit claiming the Virginia prison system violated his religious rights by refusing to allow him to grow a 1/8-inch beard. William Couch challenged the Department of Corrections' grooming policy that ban...

  • Democrats criticize hiring of firm for House remap

    Democrats criticize hiring of firm for House remap

    Recent Cases 04/18/2011

    Democratic lawmakers are raising complaints about Republican House Speaker Jim Tucker's decision to hire a law firm with national GOP ties to submit the state House remap to federal officials. The head of the House redistricting committee, Democratic...

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.