Northern States Power Company v. The City of Ashland, Wisconsin et al
| Northern States Power Company |
| The City of Ashland, Wisconsin, Soo Line Railroad Company and Wisconsin Central, LTD. |
| 3:2012cv00602 |
| August 17, 2012 |
| US District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin |
| Madison Office |
| Dane |
| Barbara B. Crabb |
| Stephen L. Crocker |
| Environmental Matters |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 9607 |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
630
ORDER: IT IS ORDERED that plaintiff Northern States Power's motions for court review of taxable costs pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(d)(1), dkts. ## 616 and 618 are GRANTED and the clerk of court's determinations of taxable costs are AFFIRMED over plaintiff'sobjections. Signed by District Judge Barbara B. Crabb on 1/5/2016. (voc)
|
|
Filing
584
JUDGMENT entered in favor of Defendant Ashland County, Wisconsin dismissing the case. (BBC /PAO). Signed by District Judge Barbara B. Crabb on 9/15/2015. (voc)
|
|
Filing
583
OPINION AND ORDER: Plaintiff Northern States Power Company's suit against defendant Ashland County is DISMISSED because the defendant County was not a "covered person" under CERCLA. Defendant City of Ashland is liable for response costs only as a "covered person" under 42 U.S.C. § 9607(a)(1). Defendant City is allocated $0 for response costs already incurred by plaintiff in remediating the Ashland Superfund site. Liability for all future response costs incurred at the Ashland Superfund site in any phase of the remediation of the site that are either (1) prescribed by settlement, agreement, court order or consent decree with the United States or with any other entity with regulatory authorit y over the Site;or (2) "necessary" and "consistent with the national contingency plan," within the meaning of § 9607(a)(4)(B) are to be allocated 100% to plaintiff and 0% to defendant City. Signed by District Judge Barbara B. Crabb on 9/11/15. (jat) Modified on 9/11/2015 (jat).
|
|
Filing
582
ORDER: That defendant Ashland County's unopposed motion to strikeplaintiff's proposed finding of fact no. 266 , dkt. # 570 , is granted and all exhibits set out in dkts. ## 559 , 574 and 575 that are not the subject of an objection are received, as are all exhibits listed above as received. The remaining exhibits are not received. Signed by District Judge Barbara B. Crabb on 9/10/2015. (voc)
|
|
Filing
573
ORDER regarding submission of the "final list of exhibits". Signed by District Judge Barbara B. Crabb on 7/29/2015. (voc)
|
|
Filing
517
JUDGMENT entered in favor of Plaintiff Northern States Power Company dismissing the case against defendant L.E. Myers Company. (BBC /PAO). Signed by Peter A. Oppeneer, Clerk of Court on 4/29/2015. (voc)
|
|
Filing
510
ORDER denying without prejudice 492 Motion in Limine to Exclude Certain Documents Untimely Produced by The City of Ashland by Plaintiff Northern States Power Company. Signed by District Judge Barbara B. Crabb on 4/24/2015. (voc)
|
|
Filing
484
ORDER granting 470 motion for leaveto file a deposition transcript by 4/21/2015. Plaintiff's motion to exclude expert Neil Ram's April 3,2015 supplemental report is granted in part and denied in part. Signed by District Judge Barbara B. Crabb on 4/16/2015. (voc)
|
|
Filing
481
OPINION and ORDER granting in part, denying in part, and staying in part 357 Defendants City of Ashland and Ashland County's Motion in Limine; denying 359 Motion to Exclude Cumulative Expert Testimony; denying 362 Motion to Exclude E xpert Testimony of Jamie Dunn; granting in part and denying in part 364 Motion to Exclude Certain Evidence; denying 368 Motion in Limine to exclude certain testimony of Kurt Herman; granting in part and denying in part 374 Motion in Limine to exclude testimony of deceased Ashland residents. Signed by District Judge Barbara B. Crabb on 4/16/15. (jat) Modified on 4/16/2015 (jat).
|
|
Filing
478
ORDER that plaintiff Northern States Power Company's emergency motion, dkt. # 335 , to exclude (1) Dr. Dennis Helsel's March 5, 2015 report; (2) certain of Dr. Alan Jeffrey's Opinion 1 and the entirety of Opinions 2 and 3 from his Mar ch 5, 2015 report; and (3) certain of Mr. Guy Patrick's supplemental opinions on phenols from his March 6, 2015 report, dkt. # 353 , is denied. Further, it is ordered, that plaintiff's motion to exclude certain documents as untimely produce d, dkt. # 355 , is granted in part and denied in part as set forth in this opinion, and plaintiff's motions to exclude the testimony of the following witnesses: (1) Dr. Emily Greenwald, dkt. # 347 ; (2) Dr. DennisR. Helsel, dkt. # 349 ; (3) Dr. Guy Patrick (certain testimony only) are denied. Plaintiff's motion to exclude certain testimony of Dr. J. Bushnell Nielsen, dkt. # 351 , is denied as moot. Signed by District Judge Barbara B. Crabb on 4/15/2015. (voc)
|
|
Filing
469
ORDER granting 342 Motion for Reconsideration or Correction re: 341 Order on Motion for Miscellaneous Relief, Order on Motion for Summary Judgment, by Defendant Ashland County, Wisconsin. Signed by District Judge Barbara B. Crabb on 4/10/2015. (voc)
|
|
Filing
462
ORDER granting 338 Joint Motion for Determination of Good Faith Settlement Between Plaintiff Northern States Power Company and Defendants Soo Line Railroad Company and Wisconsin Central LTD. Signed by District Judge Barbara B. Crabb on 4/8/2015. (voc)
|
|
Filing
383
ORDER re 338 Joint Motion for Determination of Good Faith Settlement. The parties are requested to file their responses by March 27, 2015. Signed by District Judge Barbara B. Crabb on 3/20/2015. (voc)
|
|
Filing
341
ORDER that Defendant City of Ashland's motion for summary judgment, dkt. # 147 , and defendant Ashland County's motion for summary judgment, dkt. # 165 , are GRANTED with respect to plaintiff Northern States Power Company's cost reco very claims under 42 U.S.C. § 9607 and contribution claim under § 9613 for the 2003 administrative order on consent and DENIED as to plaintiff's remaining claim under § 9613 for the 2012 consent decree. Defendant L.E. Myer s Company's motion for summary judgment, dkt. # 174 , isDENIED. Plaintiff Northern States Power Company's motion for leave to file a brief in surreply to defendants' motions for summary judgment, dkt. # 335 , is DENIED as moot. Defendants shall have until April 2, 2015 to respond to plaintiff's "emergency motion to exclude certain supplemental expert reports." Dkt. # 335 . Signed by District Judge Barbara B. Crabb on 3/18/2015. (voc)
|
|
Filing
337
ORDER re March 13, 2015 Telephone Status Conference. The parties anticipate that the plaintiff and the defendant railroads will be filing a motion for entry of the settlement agreement within a week. The court advised counsel that the court has set aside one week to try this case against the remaining defendants. Counsel should work together so as to be able to complete the trial within that period of time. Signed by District Judge Barbara B. Crabb on 3/12/2015. (voc)
|
|
Filing
55
ORDER. The order entered herein on April 1, 2013 is amended by adding to the Order section, the following provision: 5. The motions to dismiss plaintiff's original complaint filed by defendants Wisconsin Central, Ltd. and Soo Line Railroad Com pany, dkt. # 18 , and by defendant The City of Ashland, dkt. # 28 , are DENIED as mooted by the filing of plaintiff's amended complaint, dkt. # 34. In all other respects, the order remains as entered. Signed by District Judge Barbara B. Crabb on 4/5/2013. (voc)
|
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 Wisconsin Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
