State of Colorado v. Sunoco, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that the EPA's characterization of a response action deserves Skid-more deference
• concluding that the EPA's characterization of a response action deserves Skidmore deference
• holding that the plugging of a mine was a “removal” action in part because, when the plug was installed, “it was uncertain whether the plugging would achieve the goal of eliminating [contamination]”
• holding that the plugging of a mine was a “removal” action in part because, when the plug was installed, “it was uncertain whether the plugging would achieve the goal of eliminating [contamination]”
• concluding that the EPA’s characterization of a response action deserves Skidmore defer- ence
• noting that “use of this definite article suggests there will be but a single ‘removal action’ and a single ‘remedial 26 action’ per site”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).