Legal Opinion
United States v. Hardage
District Court, W.D. Oklahoma
Decided October 16, 1990No. CIV-86-1401-PPublishedCited by 38 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR REMEDY SELECTION PHASE
PHILLIPS, District Judge.
I. INTRODUCTION
This Order arises from the trial of a bifurcated portion of a CERCLA 1 case. The trial involved the selection of a remedy for the cleanup of toxic wastes at the Hard-age Superfund Site (“Hardage Site”), a closed industrial waste disposal site located near the town of Criner, Oklahoma. The parties have presented the Court with competing remedies.
The plaintiff United States of America advances an “excavation” remedy that seeks to remove a substantial portion of the wastes and hazardous…
2Cases cited39 opinions
- MCI Communications Corporation and MCI Telecommunications Corporation v. American Telephone and Telegraph CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1983
- Rothensies v. Electric Storage Battery Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1946
- United States v. Monsanto Co.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1988
- United States v. Conservation Chemical Co.District Court, W.D. Missouri · 1985
- Wallace G. Frederick v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1967
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by38 opinions
- General Electric Company v. Litton Industrial Automation Systems, Inc. And Litton Industries, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1990
- United States v. HardageCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1992
- Bancamerica Commercial Corp. v. Mosher Steel of Kansas, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1996
- United States v. HardageCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1993
- Avnet, Inc. v. Allied-Signal, Inc.District Court, D. Rhode Island · 1992
33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.