Avondale Federal Savings Bank v. Amoco Oil Co.
District Court, N.D. Illinois
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER
NORGLE, District Judge.
Before the court is Defendant Amoco Oil Company’s Motion for Summary Judgment. For the following reasons, Defendant’s motion is granted in part, and denied in part.
I. BACKGROUND 1
Plaintiff, Avondale Federal Savings Bank (“Avondale”), filed a Second Amended Complaint for Declaratory Judgment and Other Relief against Amoco Oil Company (“Amoco”). In Counts I and II, brought pursuant to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (“RCRA”), 42 U.S.C. § 6972, Avondale seeks: (1) recovery of the cleanup costs it incurred investigating and remediating solid or…
2Cases cited20 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
- City of Chicago v. International College of SurgeonsSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- State Oil Co. v. KhanSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Meghrig v. KFC Western, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1996
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Gilroy Canning Co. v. CALIFORNIA CANNERS AND GROW.District Court, N.D. California · 1998