Legal Opinion
In Re Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether ("MTBE") Products Liability Litigation
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided August 16, 2005No. Master File Nos. 1:00-1898. MDL 1358(SAS). M21-88PublishedCited by 19 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER
SCHEINDLIN, District Judge.
1. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiffs bring these actions seeking relief from the actual or threatened contamination of their groundwater with methyl tertiary butyl ether (“MTBE”), a chemical added to gasoline. Defendant Lyondell-Citgo Refining LP (“LCR”) moves, pursuant to Rule 12(b)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, to dismiss the complaints filed against it in fifteen states: Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Vermont, Virginia, and West Virginia…
2Cases cited42 opinions
- International Shoe Co. v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Burger King Corp. v. RudzewiczSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. WoodsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Helicopteros Nacionales De Colombia, S. A. v. HallSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Keeton v. Hustler Magazine, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- DirecTV Latin America, LLC v. PARK 610, LLCDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2010
- State v. Atlantic Richfield CompanySupreme Court of Vermont · 2016
- In Re Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether ("MTBE") Products Liability LitigationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2006
- In Re Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether ("MTBE") Products Liability LitigationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2006
- In Re Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether ("MTBE") Products Liability LitigationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2006
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.