Legal Opinion

United States of America South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control v. Monsanto Company Allied Corporation E.M. Industries, Inc. Defendants- American Insurance Association Chemical Manufacturers Association Amici Curiae. And South Carolina Recycling and Disposal, Inc. Columbia Organic Chemical Company Oscar Seidenberg Harvey Hutchinson Eaton Corporation Rad Services, Inc. Aquair Corporation v. G.D. Searle & Company Will Ross, Inc., Third Party United States of America South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control v. Oscar Seidenberg Harvey Hutchinson American Insurance Association Chemical Manufacturers Association, Amici Curiae. And Monsanto Company Allied Corporation Aquair Corporation E.M. Industries, Inc. South Carolina Recycling and Disposal, Inc. Columbia Organic Chemical Company Eaton Corporation Rad Services, Inc. v. G.D. Searle & Company Will Ross, Inc., Third Party United States of America and South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control v. Monsanto Company Allied Corporation E.M. Industries Inc. South Carolina Recycling and Disposal, Inc. Oscar Seidenberg Harvey Hutchinson American Insurance Association Chemical Manufacturers Association, Amici Curiae. And Columbia Organic Chemical Company Eaton Corporation Rad Services, Inc. Aquair Corporation v. G.D. Searle & Company Will Ross, Inc., Third Party

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Decided September 7, 1988No. 86-1261PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

858 F.2d 160

28 ERC 1177, 57 USLW 2170, 19 Envtl.

L. Rep. 20,085

UNITED STATES of America; South Carolina Department of

Health and Environmental Control, Plaintiffs-Appellees,

v.

MONSANTO COMPANY; Allied Corporation; E.M. Industries,

Inc.; Defendants- Appellants,

American Insurance Association; Chemical Manufacturers

Association Amici Curiae.

and

SOUTH CAROLINA RECYCLING AND DISPOSAL, INC.; Columbia

Organic Chemical Company; Oscar Seidenberg;

Harvey Hutchinson; Eaton Corporation;

Rad Services, Inc.; Aquair

Corporation; Defendants,

v.

G.D. SEARLE & COMPANY; Will Ross, Inc., Third Party Defendants.

UNITED STATES…

Also in this document: Concurring in part, dissenting in part.

2Cases cited35 opinions

  1. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  3. Blum v. StensonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  4. Weaver v. GrahamSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
  5. Bradley v. School Bd. of RichmondSupreme Court of the United States · 1974

30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. United States v. R.W. Meyer, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1989
  2. United States Environmental Protection Agency v. Sequa Corp.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1993
  3. City of Los Angeles v. San Pedro Boat WorksCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2011
  4. United States v. Harold B. Chapman, Jr.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1998
  5. Mobay Corp. v. Allied-Signal, Inc.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1991

15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API