Legal Opinion

Beazer East, Inc. v. Mead Corporation

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Decided May 13, 2008No. 06-4993PublishedCited by 36 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

WEIS, Circuit Judge.

This is the third appeal in this long-running contribution claim under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), Pub.L. No. 96-510, 94 Stat. 2767. After the second appeal was decided, defendant Mead moved for judgment for failure to state a claim or for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. The District Court denied the motions, but certified a controlling question of law under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b) raising the issue of whether the effect of Cooper Indus, v. Aviall Servs., Inc., 543 U.S. 157, 125 S.Ct. 577, 160 L.Ed.2d…

2Cases cited28 opinions

  1. Arbaugh v. Y & H Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 2006
  2. Bell v. HoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
  3. Ackermann v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1950
  4. United States v. BestfoodsSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
  5. Oneida Indian Nation v. County of OneidaSupreme Court of the United States · 1974

23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by36 opinions

  1. Cna v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2008
  2. Group Against Smog & Pollution, Inc. v. Shenango Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2016
  3. William Howe v. City of AkronCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2015
  4. Joan Mullin v. Karen BalickiCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2017
  5. Campuzano-Burgos v. Midland Credit Management., Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2008

31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API