Legal Opinion
United States v. Kramer
District Court, D. New Jersey
Decided November 19, 2008No. Civil Action 89-4340 (JBS), 89-4380(JBS)PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
SIMANDLE, District Judge.
I. INTRODUCTION
This is an extensively litigated Superfund case in which the vast majority of parties have settled and the lone claims remaining are those asserted by certain settling parties against Alumax Mill Products, Inc. (“Alumax”), the sole non-settling Defendant. Presently before the Court are three motions: (1) the Settling Work Defendants’ motion for summary judgment as to Alumax’s liability as a covered party under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (“CERCLA”) and the New Jersey Spill Compensation and Control Act…
2Cases cited35 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Hunt v. CromartieSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
- Judson C. Brewer v. Quaker State Oil Refining Corporation Quaker State CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1995
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Litgo New Jersey Inc. v. Commissioner New Jersey Department of Environmental ProtectionCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2013
- New Jersey Carpenters Pension Fund v. Housing Authority & Urban Redevelopment AgencyDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 2014
- Asarco LLC v. Cemex, Inc.District Court, W.D. Texas · 2014
- Walker v. United States Secretary of the Air ForceDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 2014
- Smart Vent, Inc. v. USA Floodair Vents, Ltd.District Court, D. New Jersey · 2016
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.