Skip to main content
Eighth Circuit· 4/5/2011

Morrison Enterprises, LLC v. Dravo Corp.

Citations

  • 638 F.3d 594
  • 2011 WL 1237526

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • holding that there was not good cause for the requested extension where the failure to meet a deadline was a tactical decision
  • reasoning that the plaintiff’s “tactical choice” to pursue claims under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (“CERCLA”
  • holding “that § 113(f) [contribution] provides the exclusive remedy for a liable party compelled to incur response costs pursuant to an administrative or judicially approved settlement under . . . [§] 107 [for cost recovery]”
  • affirming denial of leave to amend where plaintiff waited to seek amendment until after summary judgment ruling
  • affirming district court’s denial of motion for leave to amend on ground that a tactical choice not to pursue a claim earlier did not show diligence
  • affirming district court’s denial of motion for leave to amend on ground that a tactical choice not to pursue a claim earlier did not show diligence

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Riley, Chief Judge, Melloy and Gruender, Circuit Judges

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

49 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

23 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named Morrison Enterprises, LLC v. Dravo Corp.

2 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.