Legal Opinion
Beazer East, Inc. v. The Mead Corporation
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Decided November 25, 1994No. 93-3372PublishedCited by 80 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
HUTCHINSON, Circuit Judge.
Appellant, Beazer East, Inc. (“Beazer”), appeals an order of the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania dismissing Beazer’s claims for indemnity and contribution. Beazer claimed appellee, The Mead Corporation (“Mead”), was bound by a promise to pay Beazer all or part of Beazer’s response costs on a Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act, 42 U.S.C.A. §§ 9601-9675 (West 1983 & Supp.1994) (“CERCLA”), cleanup of a site Beazer’s predecessor had acquired from Mead’s predecessor. Instead, the…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- United States v. Kimbell Foods, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1979
- O'Melveny & Myers v. Federal Deposit InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Dice v. Akron, Canton & Youngstown RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1952
- Wallis v. Pan American Petroleum Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1966
- United States v. Alcan Aluminum Corp.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1992
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by80 opinions
- Ina Collins v. Mary Kay IncCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2017
- Horsehead Industries, Inc. v. Paramount Communications, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2001
- Pescatore v. Pan American World Airways, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1996
- Smithkline Beecham Corporation v. Rohm and Haas Company v. Buckeye Pipe Line Company, Rohm and Haas CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1996
- United States v. USX Corp.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1995
75 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.