Legal Opinion

United States v. Atlas Minerals and Chemicals, Inc.

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided March 1, 1994No. Civ. A. 91-5118PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

CAHN, Chief Judge.

This is a cost recovery action brought by the United States (the “government” or “United States”) pursuant to the Compre­hensive Environmental Response, Compensa­tion and Liability Act (“CERCLA”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 9601 et seq. The government has identified and sued ten potentially responsi­ble parties (“PRPs” or “defendants”) for costs allegedly incurred in cleaning up a landfill. The PRPs and the government have reached a settlement of this dispute and have embodied their settlement in a consent de­cree. Currently before the court is the Unit­ed States’ Motion to Enter…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Mistretta v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  2. United States v. Swift & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1932
  3. J. W. Hampton, Jr., & Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1928
  4. United States v. ITT Continental Baking Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1975
  5. System Federation No. 91 v. WrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1961

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Hyde Athletic Industries, Inc. v. Continental Casualty Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1997
  2. United States v. Witco Corp.District Court, D. Delaware · 1999
  3. United States v. KramerDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 1998
  4. Town of New Windsor v. Tesa Tuck, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1996
  5. United States v. Grand Rapids, MichiganDistrict Court, W.D. Michigan · 2000

5 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