Zands

Zands v. Nelson

Good Law
779 F. Supp. 1254·92 Daily Journal DAR 869·1991 WL 256358·22 Envtl. L. Rep. (Envtl. Law Inst.) 20757·34 ERC (BNA) 1561
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaDecember 3, 199189-0989-GT, 90-1144-GTCalifornia5,457 words

Opinion

Opinion

Thompson, J.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

The procedural history of the case is important:

On Monday, November 4, 1991 at 10:30 a.m., the parties came before the Court on three separate motions filed in this case. First, defendants PAUL IMON NELSON and ELLEN ELIZA NELSON filed a motion for summary judgment that was subsequently joined by defendants MILDRED TACEY, JAY AND NORMA GOODWIN, and FRITZ A. NACHANT, INC. (“Defendants’ Motions”). Second, defendant FRITZ A. NACHANT, INC. had a pending motion from September 17, 1991, that the Court had ordered further briefing on (“Nachant’s Motions”). And third, plaintiffs SAMUEL and SARA ZANDS filed a motion for partial summary judgment (“Plaintiffs’ Motions”). Having fully considered this matter, including review of the papers filed by the parties, the authorities cited therein, and the arguments presented, the Court rules as follows:

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

Defendants PAUL and ELLEN NELSON owned all title to the property in question from 1961 to November 1976. In 1972, defendant, FRITZ NACHANT CO., allegedly installed the piping and pumps for gasoline tanks at a service station on this land. This installation was done at the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.