1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.Supp.
  4. 696 F.Supp.
  5. 696 F.Supp. 249 (1988)
 

DETROIT AUDUBON SOC. v. CITY OF DETROIT

Nos. 87-CV-71577-DT, 87-CV-71578-DT.

696 F.Supp. 249 (1988)

DETROIT AUDUBON SOCIETY, a Michigan Non-Profit Corporation, North Cass Community Union, a Michigan Non-Profit Corporation, Sierra Club, a California Non-Profit Corporation and Environmental Defense Fund, Inc., a New York Non-Profit Corporation, Plaintiffs, v. CITY OF DETROIT, a Michigan Municipal Corporation, and Greater Detroit Resource Recovery Authority, Inc., a Michigan Public Corporation, and Combustion Engineering Co., Defendants. HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF the PROVINCE OF ONTARIO; Ian G. Scott, Attorney General for Ontario, and James Bradley, Minister of the Environment of the Province of Ontario, Plaintiffs, v. GREATER DETROIT RESOURCE RECOVERY AUTHORITY, and Combustion Engineering, Inc., a Delaware Corporation, Jointly and Severally, Defendants.

United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, S.D.

February 24, 1988.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Mark A. Richardson, Detroit, Mich., for Detroit Audubon Soc., North Cass Community Union and Sierra Club.

Michael Herz, New York City, for Environmental Defense Fund.

Donald Pailen, City of Detroit Corporate Counsel, Detroit, Mich., for City of Detroit.

Donnelly W. Hadden, Detroit, Mich. and Jeffrey K. Haynes, Vanderkloot & Haynes, P.C., Bloomfield Hills, Mich., for Province of Ontario.

John D. Pirich, Miller, Canfield, Paddock and Stone, Lansing, Mich., for Greater Detroit Resource Recovery Aurity, Combustion Engineering, Inc.

Stanley M. Gorinson, Joseph Cannon, Kevin Sullivan, Steven Christiansen, Washington, D.C., for Combustion Eng.

OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND JUDICIAL NOTICE OF 86-CV-72910-DT

HACKETT, District Judge.

Defendants filed a Motion for Summary Judgment pursuant to F.R.Civ.P. 56(c) and Suggestion of Judicial Notice in each of the above cases. Because these cases involve common issues and many of the pleadings filed are substantially similar, the two cases will be consolidated for purpose of the above motions only.

Plaintiffs...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases