Legal Opinion
Union Oil Co. v. Terrible Herbst, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided June 9, 2003No. Nos. 01-16683, 01-17176PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by Judge RICHARD S. ARNOLD; dissent by Judge RAWLINSON.
OPINION
RICHARD S. ARNOLD, Circuit Judge:
This appeal involves a contract dispute over who is responsible for cleaning up pollution beneath a gas station. Union Oil Company of California (Unocal) bought the service station from Terrible Herbst, Inc., in 1986 on the condition that Herbst would clean up the site. In 1990, the Nevada Department of Environmental Protection (NDEP) relieved Herbst of the duty to monitor the site but did not relieve it of liability for any damage it had already done there. The site remained polluted, but…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Charles Wetzel v. Lou Ehlers Cadillac Group Long Term Disability Insurance Program Reliance Standard Life Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2000
- Silver Sage Partners, Ltd. v. City Of Desert Hot SpringsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2001
- Harmon v. Tanner Motor Tours of Nevada, Ltd.Nevada Supreme Court · 1963
- Servatius v. United Resort Hotels, Inc.Nevada Supreme Court · 1969
- Stanley v. A. Levy & J. Zentner Co.Nevada Supreme Court · 1941
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Union Oil Company of California v. Terrible Herbst, Inc., Union Oil Company of California, Dba/unocal, a California Corporation v. Terrible Herbst, Inc., a Nevada CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003
- Embotteladora Electropura S.A. de C.V. v. Accutek Packaging Equipment Company, Inc.District Court, S.D. California · 2020
- Hartsell v. San Diego, County ofDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2021