Legal Opinion

United States v. General Battery Corporation, Inc., Exide Corporation Exide Corporation

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Decided September 6, 2005No. 03-3515PublishedCited by 39 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SCIRICA, Chief Judge.

This appeal addresses successor liability under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), 42 U.S.C. § 9601 et seq., for environmental response costs incurred by the United States at a lead-contaminated Superfund site. The District Court granted summary judgment in favor of the United States on a “de facto merger” theory of successor liability. We will affirm.

I

The matter begins with a now defunct company, Price Battery Corporation. From the 1930s through 1966, Price Battery manufactured lead acid batteries at a plant in…

2Cases cited54 opinions

  1. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. BruchSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  2. Burlington Industries, Inc. v. EllerthSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
  3. Textile Workers v. Lincoln Mills of Ala.Supreme Court of the United States · 1957
  4. Kamen v. Kemper Financial Services, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1991
  5. Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians v. HolyfieldSupreme Court of the United States · 1989

49 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by39 opinions

  1. Berg Chilling Systems, Inc. v. Hull Corporation Sp Industries, IncCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2006
  2. Marsh v. RosenbloomCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2007
  3. K.C.1986 Ltd. Partnership v. Reade ManufacturingCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2007
  4. United States v. E.I. DuPont De Nemours & Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2005
  5. Recurrent Capital Bridge Fund I, LLC v. ISR Systems & Sensors Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 2012

34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API