Legal Opinion
Atlas Tack Corp. v. Crosby
Massachusetts Appeals Court
Decided October 3, 1996No. 94-P-646PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtArmstrong, J.
The plaintiff, a Massachusetts corporation, seeks contribution from the defendants for environmental response costs incurred under G. L. c. 21E (the Massachusetts Oil and Hazardous Material Release Prevention and Response Act), resulting from contamination of a Fairhaven manufacturing site while the site was operated by a predecessor New *430York corporation (“Atlas Tack-N.Y.”). During this period, two Springfield newspaper pension funds, the Springfield Republican-Daily News Employees Beneficial Fund and the Springfield Union Employees Beneficial Fund (the “pension funds”), collectively held a…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Mardan Corporation v. C.G.C. Music, Ltd. And MacMillan Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1986
- Rollins Environmental Services, Inc. v. Superior CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1975
- Olin Corp. v. Consolidated Aluminum Corp.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1993
- Polaroid Corp. v. Rollins Environmental Services (NJ), Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1993
- The John S. Boyd Company, Inc. v. Boston Gas Company, New England Electric SystemCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1993
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Leblanc v. FriedmanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2003
- Eck v. GodboutMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2005
- Boston & Maine Corp. v. Massachusetts Bay Transportation AuthorityCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2009
- HIPSAVER CO., INC. v. JT Posey Co.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 2007
- A.J. Properties, LLC v. Stanley Black & Decker, Inc.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 2013
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.