Legal Opinion
State of Colo. v. Asarco, Inc.
District Court, D. Colorado
Decided August 29, 1985No. Civ. A. 83-C-2383PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
CARRIGAN, District Judge.
In its first amended complaint, the State of Colorado (“State” or “plaintiff”) alleges that ASARCO is liable under § 107 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (“CERCLA”), 42 U.S.C. § 9607, for damages for injury to, destruction of, and/or loss of natural resources caused by releases of hazardous substances from ASARCO’s Globe Plant, and for response costs incurred and to be incurred by the State at the site. The State also asserts pendent state law claims for statutory nuisance, strict liability, and…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Chrysler Corp. v. BrownSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Tcherepnin v. KnightSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- United States v. WadeDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1983
- United States v. Reilly Tar & Chemical Corp.District Court, D. Minnesota · 1982
- State of NY v. General Elec. Co.District Court, N.D. New York · 1984
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Dedham Water Company v. Cumberland Farms Dairy, Inc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1986
- Artesian Water Co. v. Government of New Castle CountyDistrict Court, D. Delaware · 1987
- Kelley v. Thomas Solvent Co.District Court, W.D. Michigan · 1989
- United States v. DickersonDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1986
- State of Idaho v. Howmet Turbine Component Corp.District Court, D. Idaho · 1986
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.