首页> 外文期刊>Pennsylvania journal of environmental litigation >Judge declines to find Sequa's $12.5-million claim against Sun Chemical time-barred due to agreement with NJDEP
【24h】

Judge declines to find Sequa's $12.5-million claim against Sun Chemical time-barred due to agreement with NJDEP

机译:由于与NJDEP达成协议,法官拒绝认定Sequa向Sun Chemical提出的1250万美元的索赔要求被禁止

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Without comment, U.S. Judge Madeline Cox Arleo of the District of New Jersey declined on Dec. 23 to accept Sun Chemical Corp.'s argument that plaintiff Sequa Corp.'s remediation agreement with the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection time-bars Sequa's $12.5-million cost recovery claim with respect to contamination at Sun's ink and pigment pilot plant in East Rutherford, New Jersey. (See issue of Aug. 15, 2014 P. 8.) Specifically, Sun Chemical argued that Sequa cannot, as a matter of law, assert a CERCLA cost recovery claim under Section 107 because Sequa is purportedly relegated to a CERCLA contribution claim under Section 113, which is time-barred.
机译:没有评论,新泽西州地区的美国法官马德琳·考克斯·阿莱奥(Madeline Cox Arleo)在12月23日拒绝接受Sun Chemical Corp.的论点,即原告Sequa Corp.与新泽西州环境保护部的补救协议对Sequa的12.5美元提出了时限。 Sun公司位于新泽西州东卢瑟福的油墨和颜料中试工厂因污染造成的数百万美元成本索赔。 (请参阅2014年8月15日,第8页。)具体而言,Sun Chemical辩称Sequa不能依法律主张第107条下的CERCLA成本回收要求,因为据称Sequa被降级为CERCLA缴款要求。 113,这是有时间限制的。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号