Legal Opinion
County of Suffolk v. Amerada Hess Corp.
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided July 13, 2004No. MDL 1358(SAS); No. 04Civ.5424 (SAS)PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER
SCHEINDLIN, District Judge.
This case is one of dozens of cases in a multi-district litigation (“MDL”), in which numerous plaintiffs are seeking relief from contamination or threatened contamination of groundwater from various defendants’ use of the gasoline additive methyl tertiary butyl ether (“MTBE”).1 This opinion re*355lates only to County of Suffolk, et al. v. Amerada Hess Corp., et al., No. 04 Civ. 5425.
On May 6, 2002, plaintiffs County of Suffolk and Suffolk County Water Authority (collectively “Suffolk”) filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Younger v. HarrisSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Colorado River Water Conservation District v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- McNutt v. General Motors Acceptance Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1936
- Railroad Comm'n of Tex. v. Pullman Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1941
- Burford v. Sun Oil Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1943
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- In Re Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether (" MTBE") Products Liability LitigationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2004