Legal Opinion
Cereghino v. Boeing Co.
District Court, D. Oregon
Decided September 30, 1994No. Civ. 92-247-HAPublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
HAGGERTY, District Judge:
Plaintiffs Joseph Cereghino, on his own behalf and as personal representative of the estate of Angelo Cereghino, and Mario Cereghino (collectively “Cereghinos”) brought this action, based on the contamination of their groundwater with certain chemicals, against the Boeing Company (“Boeing”) and three other corporate defendants. 1 The matter now before the court is Boeing’s motion for summary judgment. For the reasons provided below, the motion is granted.
FACTUAL and PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
A detailed factual history of this action has previously been provided by…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Edmonds v. Compagnie Generale TransatlantiqueSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- City of Rome v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- United States v. Monsanto Co.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1988
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Carney v. Internal Revenue ServiceCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2001
- P.R.S. International, Inc. v. Shred Pax Corp.Illinois Supreme Court · 1998
- In Re Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether (MTBE) ProductsDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2006
- United States v. Alcan Aluminum Corp.District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1995
- Scott Ex Rel. Scott v. Greenville Housing AuthorityCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2003
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.