Sullins

Sullins v. Exxon Mobil Corp.

Good Law
729 F. Supp. 2d 1129·2010 WL 2464963·2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 58921
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaJune 14, 201008-04927 CWCalifornia4,890 words

Opinion

Opinion

Wilken, J.

ORDER GRANTING, IN PART, AND DENYING, IN PART, DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

This case is based on the allegations that, during the time Defendant Exxon Mobil Corporation owned the real property now owned by Plaintiffs, underground storage tanks leaked, contaminating the property, and that Defendant refuses to contribute to the cost of remediating the property. Defendant moves for summary judgment on three of the four claims in Plaintiffs’ Third Amended Complaint (TAC): (1) liability under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976, 42 U.S.C. § 6972 (a)(1)(B) (RCRA Subsection B); (2) contribution; and (3) indemnity. Defendant does not seek summary judgment on Plaintiffs’ claim for continuing nuisance. Plaintiffs oppose the motion and Defendant has replied. The motion was heard on June 10, 2010. Having consid ered oral argument and all the papers filed by the parties, the Court hereby grants, in part, the motion for summary judgment.

BACKGROUND

Plaintiffs Carlton and Rita Sullins (the Sullinses) are the sole shareholders of Plaintiff Don-Sul, Inc., owner of the real property located at 187 N. L Street, Liver-more, California (the property). Plaintiffs purchased…

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.