Legal Opinion
KRYGOSKI CONST. CO., INC. v. City of Menominee
District Court, W.D. Michigan
Decided May 5, 2006No. 1:04-cv-00076PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM
EDGAR, District Judge.
This is an action for cost recovery under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 9601-9675 (“CERCLA”) and the Michigan Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act, Mich. Comp. Laws §§ 324.20101 et seq. (“NREPA”). Plaintiff Krygoski Construction Company, Inc. (“Krygoski”) seeks recovery of its alleged response costs pursuant to Section 107 of CERCLA. 42 U.S.C. § 9607. Plaintiff seeks its costs incurred in testing soil from property owned by the defendant City of Menominee (“Menominee”) and for its…
2Cases cited35 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- 60 Ivy Street Corporation (86-5500), and Coldwell Banker Commercial Group, Inc., (86-5517) v. R.C. Alexander and Doris AlexanderCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1987
- Key Tronic Corp. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- ITT Industries, Inc. v. BORGWARNER, INC.District Court, W.D. Michigan · 2010
- City of Waukegan, Ill. v. National Gypsum Co.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 2008
- Lovejoy v. Jackson Resources CompanyDistrict Court, S.D. West Virginia · 2022
- McGlone v. Centrus Energy Corp.District Court, S.D. Ohio · 2020