179 W. Va. 793 - Canestraro v. Faerber’s Empirical Analysis
1988
Citation profile
2 district · 18 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently April 2018 · most notably 223 W. Va. 724 - Huffman v. Goals Coal Co. (2009), 195 W. Va. 726 - Rose v. Oneida Coal Co., Inc. (1995)
2 district · 18 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Applies 30 U.S.C. § 1201 (Abandoned Mine Reclamation Act of 1990) · 30 U.S.C. § 1253 · 30 U.S.C. § 1255 · 30 U.S.C. § 1257
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[w]hen a provision of the West Virginia Surface Coal Mining and Reclamation Act * * * is inconsistent with federal requirements, * * * the state act must be read in a way consistent with the federal act.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage“"States with an approved State program shall implement, administer, enforce and maintain it in accordance with the Act, this chapter, and the provisions of the approved State program." This regulation requires the State to abide not just by the provisions of the state program, but also by the provisions of SMCRA and regulations promulgated pursuant to SMCRA. In a case such as this, when there is a conflict between the federal and state provisions, the less restrictive state provision must yield to the more stringent federal provision notwithstanding the administrative approval of the state law by OSM.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“Once a state plan is approved under the federal Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act, any subsequent amendments to such plan do not become effective until approved by the federal Office of Surface Mining, and may not be approved by the Office of Surface Mining if inconsistent with the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.