Legal Opinion · Dissent

Aviall Services, Inc. v. Cooper Industries, Inc.

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Decided August 14, 2001No. 00-10197Published

1DissentWiener, Circuit Judge

In reaching its holding that a PRP can only sue another PRP on a § 113(f)(1) contribution claim if a § 106 administrative order or § 107(a) action has been brought against it, the panel majority claims to have applied a “plain-meaning” analysis to the statute; yet it obviously has glossed over clear statutory language declaring that “[njothing in [§ 113(f)(1)] shall diminish the right of any person to bring an action for contribution in the absence of a civil action under [§ 106] ... or [§ 107(a)][,]"1 I respectfully dissent because I am convinced that a full and fair reading of § 113(f)(1)…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Services, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1998
  2. Buckhannon Board & Care Home, Inc. v. West Virginia Dept. of Health and Human ResourcesSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
  3. Morissette v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1952
  4. Gade v. National Solid Wastes Management Assn.Supreme Court of the United States · 1992
  5. United States v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 1993

16 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