Skip to main content
· 8/25/2009

United States v. Apex Oil Co., Inc.

Citations

  • 579 F.3d 734
  • 69 ERC 1658
  • 39 Envtl. L. Rep. (Envtl. Law Inst.) 20189
  • 69 ERC (BNA) 1658
  • 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 19087
  • 52 Bankr. Ct. Dec. (CRR) 2

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that bankruptcy didn’t discharge an injunction requiring an environmental clean-up
  • “If for example you have a decree of specific performance (a type of injunction and therefore an equitable remedy
  • “That equitable remedies are always orders to act or not to act, rather than to pay, is a myth; equity often orders payment.”
  • “That equitable remedies are always orders to act or not to act, rather than to pay, is a myth; equity often orders payment.”
  • “[T]he government’s equitable claim ... entitles the government only to require the defendant to clean up the contaminated site at the defendant’s expense.... The plaintiff in our case (the government
  • “[I]f the holder of an equitable claim can, in the event the equitable remedy turns out to be unobtainable, obtain a money judgment instead, the claim is discharageable.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Cudahy, Posner, Kanne

Read full opinion on CourtListener

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.