State v. Sorenson

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “the statute is ambiguous” and “does not require that an attainment demonstration be based solely ... on photochemical grid modeling”
• holding that ‘‘the statute is ambiguous’’ and ‘‘does not require that an attain- ment demonstration be based solely TTT on photochemical grid modeling’’
• holding that, although “Texas’ modeled control strategy alone did not demonstrate attainment of the NAAQS for ozone,” the state’s supplemental analysis did and EPA’s approval of the attainment demonstration on that basis was “reasonable and ... entitled to deference”
• holding that, although ‘‘Texas’ modeled control strategy alone did not demonstrate attain- ment of the NAAQS for ozone,’’ the state’s supplemental analysis did and EPA’s approval of the attainment demon- stration on that basis was ‘‘reasonable and TTT entitled to deference’’

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).