Opinion

County of Cook v. John Sexton Contractors Co.

  • 75 Ill. 2d 494
  • 27 Ill. Dec. 489
  • 389 N.E.2d 553
  • 1979 Ill. LEXIS 289
Court
Illinois Supreme Court
Filed
Apr 18, 1979
Status
Published
Author
Ryan
On the bench
Moran, Goldenhersh, Underwood, Ryan
Cited by
71 cases
Authority
More cited than 9.6%

Superseded by statute, as recognized in Village of Carpentersville v. Pollution Control Board

superseded by statute on other grounds as recognized in Village of Carpentersville v. Pollution Control Board, 135 Ill. 2d 463 (1990)

How later courts described this case

  • superseded by statute on other grounds as recognized in Village of Carpentersville v. Pollution Control Board, 135 Ill. 2d 463 (1990)
  • “This court held [in Carlson] that the [IEPA] preempted local regulation” (emphasis added)
  • rejecting challenge to municipal zoning ordinance

Written by the judges who cited it.

Later courts went against this

  • Superseded by statute, as recognized in Village of Carpentersville v. Pollution Control Board

    75 Ill.2d 494, 27 Ill.Dec. 489, 389 N.E.2d 553, 557 (1979), superseded by statute on other grounds as recognized in Village of Carpentersville v. Pollution Control Bd., 135 Ill.2d 463, 142 Ill.Dec. 848, 553 N.E.2d 362, 367 (1990)).
    Illinois Supreme CourtMar 29, 1990by statuteother groundsmedium confidenceRead it

The opinion

MR. JUSTICE RYAN, specially concurring:

Although I agree with the result reached by the majority, I cannot agree with the dicta contained in the opinion concerning the lack of authority of non-home-rule units of local government to regulate sanitary landfills. This case involves only the question of the authority of a home rule unit to regulate the location of landfills through the use of zoning power. There is no need to discuss in this case what authority a non-home-rule unit has in this area. To me, it seems inappropriate to attempt to transfuse vitality by the use of dicta into Carlson v. Village of Worth (1975), 62 Ill. 2d 406 , a case I view as one of questionable precedential value. If this court, which is now differently composed than when Village of Worth was decided, wishes to again consider the issues that were before the court in that case, it should do so when those issues are involved in a case before the court and are properly briefed and argued. For the reasons stated, and under the authority cited in my dissent in Village of Worth, and my dissent from the supplemental opinion on rehearing in that case, I believe that non-home-rule units have been granted authority to regulate the disposal of garbage and waste, and the location of landfills, and that the authority granted by statute has never been modified or rescinded.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.