dc.contributor.author |
Donegan, Bridget |
|
dc.date.accessioned |
2010-08-24T19:23:20Z |
|
dc.date.available |
2010-08-24T19:23:20Z |
|
dc.date.issued |
2009 |
|
dc.identifier.citation |
25 J. ENVTL. L. & LITIG. 455 (2009) |
en_US |
dc.identifier.issn |
1049-0280 |
|
dc.identifier.uri |
http://hdl.handle.net/1794/10632 |
|
dc.description |
40 p. |
en_US |
dc.description.abstract |
Part I of this Comment examines the Great Lakes Compact and its effect in
Michigan and Wisconsin. Part II provides background on the public
trust doctrine and its evolution in Michigan and Wisconsin, including
its scope, the obligations of the states as trustees, and the availability
of citizen standing to enforce the trust. Part III explains how the
Compact’s public trust is distinct from the states’ traditional public
trust doctrines. The Comment concludes that judicial recognition of a
distinct Compact trust, defined by the scope and purpose of the
Compact itself, will best reconcile the Compact’s purposes with
traditional state public trust doctrines. |
en_US |
dc.language.iso |
en_US |
en_US |
dc.publisher |
University of Oregon School of Law |
en_US |
dc.title |
Journal of Environmental Law & Litigation : Vol. 25, No. 1, p. 455-494 : The Great Lakes Compact and the Public Trust Doctrine: Beyond Michigan and Wisconsin Common Law |
en_US |
dc.title.alternative |
The Great Lakes Compact and the Public Trust Doctrine: Beyond Michigan and Wisconsin Common Law |
en_US |
dc.type |
Article |
en_US |