Carson Harbor Village, Ltd. v. Unocal Corporation

Good Law
2001 Daily Journal DAR 11365·270 F.3d 863·154 Oil & Gas Rep. 509·32 Envtl. L. Rep. (Envtl. Law Inst.) 20180·53 ERC (BNA) 1321
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 24, 200198-55107California16,085 words

Opinion

Opinion

270 F.3d 863 (9th Cir. 2001) CARSON HARBOR VILLAGE, LTD., A LIMITED PARTNERSHIP DBA CARSON HARBOR VILLAGE MOBILHOME PARK, PLAINTIFF-COUNTER-DEFENDANT-APPELLANT, v. UNOCAL CORPORATION, A DELAWARE CORPORATION, DEFENDANT-CROSS-DEFENDANT, AND CITY OF CARSON, DEFENDANT-CROSS-DEFENDANT-CROSS-CLAIMANT-APPELLEE. Nos. 98-55056, 98-55107, 98-55210, 98-55213, 98-55215 and 98-55422 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT Argued and Submitted September 13, 1999 Filed September 14, 2000 Rehearing En Banc Granted and Opinion Withdrawn February 13, 2001 Argued and Submitted June 19, 2001 Filed October 24, 2001 [Copyrighted Material Omitted][Copyrighted Material Omitted] Frank Gooch III (argued), Gilchrist & Rutter, Santa Monica, California, and Christopher M. Amantea (argued), McDermott, Will & Emery, Los Angeles, California, for plaintiff-appellant Carson Harbor Village, Ltd. Lisa Bond (argued), Richards, Watson & Gershon, Los Angeles, California, for defendant-appellee City of Carson. Thomas C. Sites, Gallagher & Gallagher, Los Angeles, California, for defendant-appellee City of Compton. Charles A. Jordan, Holley & Galen, Los Angeles, California, and Richard C.…

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.