Legal Opinion
In Re Hanford Nuclear Reservation Litigation
District Court, E.D. Washington
Decided November 3, 2004No. CV-91-3015-WFNPublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER RE: PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT — ABNORMALLY DANGEROUS ACTIVITY
NIELSEN, Senior District Judge.
This Order relates to: All Cases
At the tenth status conference on October 28, 2004, the Court reserved ruling on Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment — Abnormally Dangerous Activity, filed September 9, 2004 (Ct.Rec.1564). Argument was presented by Peter Nord-berg for the Plaintiffs and William (Randy) Squires for the Defendants. 1
The Court has reviewed the file, all materials submitted on the Motion, considered the oral arguments of counsel, and is fully informed. For the reasons…
2Cases cited30 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
- English v. General Electric Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Silkwood v. Kerr-McGee Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Buckman Co. v. Plaintiffs' Legal CommitteeSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Phillips v. E.I. Dupont De Nemours & Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007
- Phillips v. E.I. DuPont De Nemours & Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007
- Phillips v. E.I. Dupont de Nemours & Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007
- Adkisson v. Jacobs Eng'g Grp., Inc.District Court, E.D. Tennessee · 2018
- In Re Hanford Nuclear Reservation LitigationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.