Legal Opinion
United States v. Power Engineering Co.
District Court, D. Colorado
Decided June 10, 1998No. Civil Action 97-B-1654PublishedCited by 19 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
BABCOCK, District Judge.
Plaintiff, the United States of America (the “United States”), acting on behalf of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (the “EPA”), pursuant to Fed. R.Civ.P. 65 and section 3008(a)(1) of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (“RCRA”), as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 6928(a)(1) (1994 & Supp.1997), seeks a preliminary injunction directing the defendants, Power Engineering Company (“PEC”), Redoubt, Ltd. (“Redoubt”), and Richard Lilien-thal (“Lilienthal”), to comply with state regulations adopted by the Colorado Department of…
2Cases cited30 opinions
- Landgraf v. USI Film ProductsSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Amoco Production Co. v. Village of GambellSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Weinberger v. Romero-BarceloSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- United States v. Conservation Chemical Co.District Court, W.D. Missouri · 1985
- United States of America, Ex Rel. The Citizen Band Potawatomi Indian Tribe of Oklahoma v. Enterprise Management Consultants, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1989
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- People v. Thoro Products Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Colorado · 2003
- Interfaith Community Organization v. Honeywell International, Inc.District Court, D. New Jersey · 2003
- People v. Thoro Products Co.Colorado Court of Appeals · 2002
- Lewis v. General Electric Co.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 1999
- United States v. Power Engineering Company Redoubt, Ltd. And Richard J. Lilienthal, Defendants-Third-Party v. Jack Lilienthal, Third-Party-DefendantCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1999
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.