Crown Cork & Seal Co., Inc. v. Dockery
District Court, M.D. North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
TILLEY, District Judge.
This action arises out of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (“CERCLA”). Specifically, Plaintiffs, Crown Cork & Seal Company, Inc. (“Crown Cork”) and Clark Equipment Company (“Clark”) have brought this action seeking, inter alia, contribution for response costs incurred by them and paid to the United States and a declaratory judgment that each defendant is jointly and severally liable to Plaintiffs for future necessary response costs. Defendants are some twenty parties, including (1) current owner-operators of the…
2Cases cited33 opinions
- International Shoe Co. v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Burger King Corp. v. RudzewiczSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. WoodsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Hanson v. DencklaSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
- David T. Combs Sarah E. Combs v. James O. Bakker Tammy Faye Bakker Richard DortchCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1989
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Lane v. Lucent Technologies, Inc.District Court, M.D. North Carolina · 2005
- Regent Lighting Corp. v. American Lighting Concept, Inc.District Court, M.D. North Carolina · 1997
- Regent Lighting Corp. v. Galaxy Electrical Manufacturing, Inc.District Court, M.D. North Carolina · 1996
- Hall v. Tyco International Ltd.District Court, M.D. North Carolina · 2004
- Akeva L.L.C. v. Mizuno Corp.District Court, M.D. North Carolina · 2002
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.