Legal Opinion

Ekotek Site PRP Committee v. Self

District Court, D. Utah

Decided June 11, 1996No. 94-27PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

LUNGSTRUM, District Judge.

Plaintiff The Ekotek Site PRP Committee (plaintiff) brings this action seeking contribution for the expense it incurred due to the clean up of the Ekotek site. On February 20, 1996, the court held a hearing on plaintiffs motion for partial summary judgment on whether or not each defendant is a responsible party under section 9607(a) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation & Liability Act (CERCLA), 42 U.S.C. § 9601 et seq. At the hearing, the Liaison Defendants challenged the procedural approach taken and the conclusions reached…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. United States v. First City National Bank of HoustonSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  3. Evelyn Hancock v. City of Oklahoma City, a Municipal CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1988
  4. County Line Investment Company And, Wagco Land Development, Inc. v. Calvin L. TinneyCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1991
  5. Anderson v. United Auto WorkersDistrict Court, D. Kansas · 1990

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Nixon-Egli Equipment Co. v. John A. Alexander Co.District Court, C.D. California · 1996
  2. Otay Land Co. v. U.E. Ltd., L.P., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2017
  3. Securities & Exchange Commission v. JacksonDistrict Court, S.D. Texas · 2012
  4. United States v. Iron Mountain Mines, Inc.District Court, E.D. California · 1997
  5. Morgan v. Exxon Corp.Supreme Court of Alabama · 2003

1 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