Mid-Valley Pipeline Co. v. Sunoco Pipeline, L.P.
District Court, E.D. Kentucky
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
DANNY C. REEVES, District Judge.
This matter is pending for consideration of defendant S.J. Louis Construction, Inc.’s (“S. J. Louis”) motion to dismiss. [Record No. 14] S.J. Louis asserts that Defendant Mid-Valley Pipeline Co. (“Mid-Valley”) is not entitled to indemnification or reimbursement for any fines imposed under the Clean Water Act. It also argues that Counts I and II of the Complaint— both of which assert claims under common law negligence theories — are either preempted by federal law or are otherwise inapplicable. Additionally, it contends that the…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Reiter v. Sonotone Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Silkwood v. Kerr-McGee Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
- United States v. Kimbell Foods, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1979
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Keller Transport, Inc. v. Wagner Entersprises, LLCDistrict Court, D. Montana · 2012
- Cheek v. GL NV24 Shipping, Inc.District Court, S.D. Georgia · 2023
- Crum v. GL NV24 Shipping, Inc.District Court, S.D. Georgia · 2023
- Glynn County, Georgia v. GL NV24 Shipping Inc.District Court, S.D. Georgia · 2023