Legal Opinion
United States v. Vertac Chemical Corp.
District Court, E.D. Arkansas
Decided October 12, 1993No. Civ. LR-C-80-109 and LR-C-80-110PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
GEORGE HOWARD, Jr., District Judge.
In the present case, the State of Arkansas and Vertac along with Hercules have filed motions for summary judgment asking that the United States be held liable under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (“CERCLA”), 42 U.S.C. § 9601 et seq. for its role in the production of Agent Orange. 1 In response, the United States has filed a motion for partial summary judgment asking that the Court find that it is not liable.
Hercules and Vertac argue that the United States is hable as an operator…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- In Re "Agent Orange" Product Liability LitigationDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1984
- United States v. Northeastern Pharmaceutical & Chemical Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1986
- Ryan v. Dow Chemical Co.District Court, E.D. New York · 1992
- United States v. Aceto Agricultural Chemicals Corp.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1989
- CPC International, Inc. v. Aerojet-General Corp.District Court, W.D. Michigan · 1989
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Costner v. URS Consultants, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1998
- United States v. Hercules, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2001
- United States v. Vertac Chemical Corp.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1995
- United States v. Vertac Chemical Corp.District Court, E.D. Arkansas · 1997
- East Bay Municipal Utility District v. United States Department of CommerceDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1996
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.