California v. Neville Chemical Co.
Opinion
Opinion
Snyder, J.
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS
The Court finds plaintiffs motion appropriate for decision without oral’ argument. Fed.R.Civ.P. 78; Local Rule 7-15.
I. INTRODUCTION
This case is a cost-recovery action brought by plaintiff State of California on behalf of the Department of Toxic Substances Control (“DTSC”) against defendant Neville Chemical Company pursuant to the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (“CERCLA”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 9601 et seq. In an order dated May 16, 2002, the Court granted plaintiffs motion for summary judgment on the issue of defendant’s liability for response costs incurred by plaintiff pursuant to the CERCLA while supervising the cleanup of hazardous materials at defendant’s chemical manufacturing facility. In granting summary judgment, the Court found that defendant’s affirmative defense of equitable estoppel was not available under CERCLA, but did not explicitly address defendant’s counterclaim for equitable estoppel. May 16, 2002 Order Granting Plaintiffs Motion For Summary Judgment (“May 16, 2002 Order”). Defendant communicated to plaintiff that it intended to proceed with its…