Legal Opinion
California Department of Toxic Substances Control v. Alco Pacific, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided November 28, 2007No. 05-55962PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
FOGEL, District Judge:
The California Department of Toxic Substances Control (“the State”) brought this cost recovery action under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (“CERCLA”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 9601 et seq., seeking cleanup costs arising from the release of hazardous substances at a former lead processing facility (“the site”) operated by Aleo Pacific, Inc. and Morris P. Kirk (collectively, “Aleo”). The State asserts that Defendants RSR Corporation (“RSR”), Quemetco, Inc. (“Quemetco”), Davis Wire Corporation (“Davis”), Pasminco, Inc. (“Pasminco”), and P. Kay…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Louisiana-Pacific Corp. v. ASARCO Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1994
- Catellus Development Corporation v. United States of America, Defendant-Amicus, General Automotive, Inc., a Washington CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1994
- A & W Smelter & Refiners, Inc. v. ClintonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1998
- Cadillac Fairview/California, Inc. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1994
- California Ex Rel. State Department of Toxic Substances v. Summer Del Caribe, Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 1993
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- United States v. General Electric Co.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2012
- Team Enterprises, LLC v. Western Investment Real Estate TrustCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2011
- Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. RenzDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2011
- United States v. Dico, Inc.District Court, S.D. Iowa · 2012
- Parex Bank v. Russian Savings BankDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2000
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.