Legal Opinion
Brewer v. Monsanto Corp.
District Court, M.D. Tennessee
Decided August 15, 1986No. 1-85-0071PublishedCited by 25 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM
WISEMAN, Chief Judge.
This case is now before the Court on motions to dismiss filed by two of the three defendants. The plaintiffs’ central contention is that defendant Monsanto manufactured and defendants Duracell and Emhart used polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and associated toxic chemicals 1 in a way that caused injury to the plaintiffs. Defendant Monsanto, manufacturer of the PCBs has not filed a motion to dismiss. As used hereinafter, defendants shall refer only to defendant Duracell and defendant Emhart, unless otherwise noted. The two defendants were the successive owners of…
2Cases cited40 opinions
- Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Scheuer v. RhodesSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Hanna v. PlumerSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Guaranty Trust Co. v. YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Guaranty Trust Co. v. YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- United States v. Community Health Systems, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2007
- Clayton Coffey v. Foamex L.P., and Recticel Foam CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1993
- Gay v. AkinSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1988
- Blailock v. O'BANNONMississippi Supreme Court · 2001
- Raines v. Shoney's, Inc.District Court, E.D. Tennessee · 1995
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.