United States v. Atlas Minerals and Chemicals, Inc.
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
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
- Mistretta v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- United States v. Swift & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1932
- J. W. Hampton, Jr., & Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1928
- United States v. ITT Continental Baking Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1975
- 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
- Hyde Athletic Industries, Inc. v. Continental Casualty Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1997
- United States v. Witco Corp.District Court, D. Delaware · 1999
- United States v. KramerDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 1998
- Town of New Windsor v. Tesa Tuck, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1996
- United States v. Grand Rapids, MichiganDistrict Court, W.D. Michigan · 2000
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.