Legal Opinion

Beazer East, Inc. v. Mead Corp.

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Decided June 23, 2005No. 02-3727, 02-4185PublishedCited by 24 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

ROTH, Circuit Judge.

The Mead Corporation appeals several orders of the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania in a CERCLA 1 contribution action brought by Beazer East, Inc. The main issue presented in these appeals is whether the District Court, over Mead’s objection, properly referred part of Beazer’s action- — ■ the equitable allocation proceeding — to the Magistrate Judge. In conducting this proceeding, the Magistrate Judge resolved factual disputes going to one of the ultimate issues in the case — what share of Beazer’s response costs should be borne…

2Cases cited44 opinions

  1. Gomez v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  2. La Buy v. Howes Leather Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1957
  3. Peretz v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  4. United States v. Alcan Aluminum Corp.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1992
  5. United States v. William M. Davis, Ashland, Inc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2001

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

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. Beazer East, Inc. v. Mead CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2008
  2. Willingboro Mall, Ltd. v. 240/242 Franklin Avenue, L.L.C. (069082)Supreme Court of New Jersey · 2013
  3. Halliburton Energy Services, Inc. v. NL IndustriesDistrict Court, S.D. Texas · 2008
  4. MPM Silicones, LLC v. Union Carbide Corp.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2020
  5. State Ex Rel. Universal Processing Services, LLC v. Circuit Court of Milwaukee CountyWisconsin Supreme Court · 2017

19 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