The STATE OF NEW YORK and the Town of Tusten, Plaintiffs,
v.
SCA SERVICES, INC., John Cortese Construction Corporation, John Cortese, and Sheldon Wernick, Defendants.
SCA SERVICES, INC., John Cortese Construction Corporation, John Cortese, and Sheldon Wernick, Third-Party Plaintiffs,
v.
ROBERTS & CARLSON, INC., Continental Can Company, Inc., BASF Corporation (Inmont Division), Kay-Fries Inc., National Starch and Chemical Corporation, Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc., and John Does 1-99, Third-Party Defendants.
United States District Court, S.D. New York.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
April 8, 1991.
April 8, 1991.
Attorney(s) appearing for the Case
Robert Abrams, Atty. Gen., State of N.Y., New York Dept. of Law, Environmental Protection Bureau by Michael J. Moore, Albany, N.Y., for plaintiffs.
Goldstein & Stoloff by Carl P. Goldstein, Monticello, N.Y., for Town of Tusten.
Saul, Ewing, Remick & Saul by John F. Stoviak, Philadelphia, Pa., for SCA Services, Inc.
Clifford Gordon by Clifford Gordon, Monticello, N.Y., for John Cortese and John Cortese Const. Corp.
Solomon & Simon by Arnold L. Simon, Livingston, N.J., for Sheldon Wernick.
McCarter & English by John A. McKinney, Newark, N.J., for Roberts & Carlson, Inc.
Dickerson & Reilly by John H. Reilly, New York City, for Continental Can Co., Inc.
Patton, Boggs & Blow by Elliott P. Laws, Washington, D.C., for BASF Corp. (Inmont Div.).
Jackson & Nash by George S. Flint, New York City, for HULS America, Inc. (successor to Kay-Fries Inc.).
Riker, Danzig, Scherer, Hyland & Perretti by Samuel P. Moulthrop, Morristown, N.J., for Nat. Starch and Chemical Corp.
Consolidated Edison Co. of New York, Inc. by Michael A. Wilcken, New York City.
United States District Court, S.D. New York.
OPINION AND ORDER
ROBERT P. PATTERSON, Jr., District Judge.
In an opinion and order dated January 9, 1991 the Court denied plaintiff Town of Tusten's ("the Town") motion for judgment on the pleadings dismissing certain counterclaims interposed by defendant SCA Services, Inc. ("SCA"). 754 F.Supp. 995. The Court ordered additional briefing relating to the Town's motion for judgment on counterclaims three and four. This...
Let's get started
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.
