In Re Hawk Mountain Corp.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that town’s expert testimony that proposed sewage system “did not comply with several of the health regulations . . . including the standards for distances between leach field, for emergency replacement areas, and for manhole distribution” was sufficient to rebut presumption
• noting that certificate of compliance from Agency of Environmental Conservation “created a rebuttable presumption that the [proposal] . . . complie[d] with regulations governing the land application of waste disposal”
• stating that, in considering whether there was undue water pollution pursuant to Act 250’s Criterion 1, Environmental Board was not limited to considering factors listed in that provision, including compliance with health and environmental regulations

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).