Village of Wilsonville v. SCA Services, Inc.
Illinois Supreme Court
86 Ill. 2d 1, 426 N.E.2d 824 (1981)
- Written by Liz Nakamura, JD
Facts
SCA Services, Inc. (defendant) operated a hazardous-chemical-waste disposal site adjacent to the Village of Wilsonville (plaintiff). The hazardous chemical waste was placed in steel drums and buried in the ground over an abandoned coal mine. There was significant subsidence from the abandoned mine, causing the ground encasing the waste barrels to shift as tunnels in the mine underneath collapsed. The site was located near groundwater, and the town had 73 groundwater wells. The village sued SCA to enjoin the disposal operations as a public nuisance. The trial court ruled in the village’s favor, finding that the waste-disposal site was a public nuisance, that chemical waste spills had occurred, and that the site was in danger of explosion or groundwater contamination. The court issued a permanent injunction and ordered the waste be removed and the site cleaned. SCA appealed, arguing (1) the trial court did not properly consider the risk the prospective harm would actually occur; (2) the court failed to consider that the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA) had issued a permit for the site’s operation; and (3) the court did not balance the relative harm to both parties in ordering the injunction. The IEPA permit relied entirely on data collected by SCA that site subsidence would be negligible.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Clark, J.)
Concurrence (Ryan, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.