Legal Opinion

Locke v. Liquid Air Corp.

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

Decided March 2, 1984No. 83-7150PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

JOHNSON, Circuit Judge:

Defendant Liquid Air’s Decatur, Alabama, plant manufactures acetylene gas. The resulting by-product of the manufacturing process, a slurry compound of water and lime, is pumped into holding ponds or sludge pits; the lime settles to the bottom, leaving a pool of water. Lime slurry, although having a higher pH content than tapwater, is not toxic or poisonous. For several years the Liquid Air plant in Decatur operated with two slurry holding ponds. A third pond, in which plaintiff James Locke’s son, Sean Locke, drowned, was constructed in 1980 and 1981 to meet the…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Sweat v. Miller Brewing Co.Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1983
  2. Tolbert v. GulsbySupreme Court of Alabama · 1976
  3. Rose v. Miller & Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1983
  4. Alabama Great Southern Railroad Co. v. GreenSupreme Court of Alabama · 1964
  5. Cox v. Alabama Water Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1927

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Casper v. Charles F. Smith & Son, Inc.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1989
  2. Casper v. Chas. F. Smith & Son, Inc.Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1987
  3. Lapidus v. NCL America LLCDistrict Court, S.D. Florida · 2013
  4. Burton v. Carnival CorporationDistrict Court, S.D. Florida · 2024
  5. Locke v. Liquid Air CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1984

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API