Legal Opinion
United States v. Metropolitan District Commission
District Court, D. Massachusetts
Decided January 7, 1991No. Civ. A. 85-0489-MA, 83-1614-MAPublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
MAZZONE, District Judge.
This matter is before me on the joint motion of The Town of Norfolk, Massachusetts and the Town of Walpole, Massachusetts (the “Towns”) to intervene for a limited purpose in this action. The Towns seek to intervene as of right pursuant to Rule 24(a) Fed.R.Civ.P. or, alternatively, pursuant to Rule 24(b). The Massachusetts Water Resources Authority (the “MWRA”) has filed an opposition to the motion, as has the United States.
I. History.
A brief summary of this case to date is helpful in understanding the context in which the motion has been filed. In…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Culbreath v. DukakisCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1980
- Travelers Indemnity Co. v. DingwellCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1989
- City of Oak Creek v. Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage DistrictDistrict Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 1983
3Cited by3 opinions
- United States v. Metropolitan District CommissionDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 1991
- Town of Norfolk v. United States Environmental Protection AgencyDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 1991
- Bildman v. Astra USA, Inc.Massachusetts Superior Court · 1996