Legal Opinion

Emhart Industries, Inc. v. New England Container Co.

District Court, D. Rhode Island

Decided August 17, 2017No. C.A. No. 06-218 S, C.A. No. 11-023 SPublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

PHASE II FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

William E. Smith, Chief Judge

I. Introduction

Dioxip and other toxic chemical pollution at the Centredale Manor Restoration Project Superfund Site (“Centredale Site” or “Site”) in North Providence, Rhode Island, has led to going on ten years of litigation over which parties are responsible and what is the appropriate remedy. The Court divided the litigation into three phases. (See Eighth Revised Case Management Order, ECF No. 295.)1 At the close of trial in Phase I, the Court found Emhart jointly and severally liable for the release of dioxin at…

2Cases cited36 opinions

  1. Motor Vehicle Mfrs. Assn. of United States, Inc. v. State Farm Mut. Automobile Ins. Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
  2. Citizens to Preserve Overton Park, Inc. v. VolpeSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  3. Bowman Transportation, Inc. v. Arkansas-Best Freight System, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1975
  4. Sims v. ApfelSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  5. Camp v. PittsSupreme Court of the United States · 1973

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. United States v. Puerto Rico Indus. Dev. Co.United States District Court · 2019
  2. Emhart Industries v. CNA Holdings LLCCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2021

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

Powered by the Exa API