Legal Opinion

California River Watch v. City of Vacaville

District Court, E.D. California

Decided November 30, 2020No. 2:17-cv-00524Unknown

1Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 California River Watch, No. 2:17-cv-00524-KJM-KJIN 12 Plaintiff, ORDER 13 v. City of Vacaville, IS Defendants. 16 17 The City of Vacaville was the defendant in this action under the Resource Conservation 18 | and Recovery Act (RCRA). It has requested an award of costs, and River Watch, the plaintiff, 19 | objects. The matter was submitted without a hearing. 20 River Watch alleged at the outset of this case that Vacaville had violated the RCRA 21 | because hexavalent chromium in the City’s public water…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Satterlee v. MatthewsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1829
  2. United States v. Carlos Rodriguez-SanchezCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1994
  3. Quan v. Computer Sciences Corp.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2010
  4. Taniguchi v. Kan Pacific Saipan, Ltd.Supreme Court of the United States · 2012

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

Powered by the Exa API