Rolan et al v. Atlantic Richfield Company et al
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|Date Filed||#||Document Text|
|May 3, 2018
OPINION AND ORDER: DENYING 114 Joint MOTION for Protective Order by Plaintiffs and by Defendants Atlantic Richfield Company, E.I. Du Pont De Nemours and Company, The Chemours Company. The parties may submit a revised stipulated protective order consistent with the requirements of Rule 26(c), this Opinion and Order, and Seventh Circuit case law. Signed by Magistrate Judge Susan L Collins on 5/3/2018. (lhc)
|July 26, 2017
OPINION AND ORDER: The Court GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART Dft Atlantic Richfield Company's Motion to Dismiss 39 , GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART Defendants E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company, and the Chemours Company's Amended Mo tion to Dismiss 45 , TERMS the Dfts' Motions for Judicial Notice 41 , 44 , and DENIES the Plas' Motion to Certify Class 4 with LEAVE TO REFILE based upon the claims remaining after this Order. Specifically, the Court: (1) DENIES the Dfts' Motions to Dismiss as to the Plas' CERCLA Section 107(a) Claim for Cost Recovery; (2) GRANTS Dft Atlantic Richfield Company's Motion to Dismiss as to the Plas' nuisance and negligence claims against it; (3) GRANTS Dfts E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company, and the Chemours Company's Amended Motion to Dismiss as to the Plas' nuisance claim against them; and (4) DENIES Dfts E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company, and the Chemours Company's Amended Motion to Dismiss as to the Plas' negligence claim against them. Signed by Chief Judge Theresa L Springmann on 7/26/2017. (lhc)
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system.
A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Indiana Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?