Legal Opinion

City of Pawtucket

United States Court of Claims

Decided September 30, 1976No. 304—75PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Water Quality Improvement Act; oil-spül clecm-up costs. — On September 30, 1976 the court entered the following order:

Before Davis, Judge, Presiding, KitNzig and BeN-Nett, Judges. .; . .

“The City of Pawtucket (City) seeks reimbursement for clean-up expenses it incurred combatting an nil .spill from two city-owned storage tanks. The City relies on Section 11 *325(i) (1) of- tlie Water Quality Improvement Act of 1970, 33 U.S.C. -§ÍS21(i) (1) (1970) (Supp. Y, 1975), which states:

Recovery of removal costs(i) (1) In. any case where an owner or operator of a vessel or an onshore facility or an offshore…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Housing Corp. of America v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1972
  2. Ramona Freeman, Etc. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1975
  3. United States v. Ira S. Bushey & Sons, Inc.District Court, D. Vermont · 1973
  4. Dorothy Healey v. Federal Communications Commission and United States of America, Metromedia, Inc., IntervenorCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1972
  5. United States v. Ira S. Bushey & Sons, IncCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1973

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. United States v. Maryland Bank & Trust Co.District Court, D. Maryland · 1986
  2. Reliance Insurance v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1982
  3. Union Petroleum Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1981
  4. Proctor Wholesale Co.United States Court of Claims · 1978
  5. Atlantic Richfield Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1982

7 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