 | | RECENT STATE DECISIONS |
February 2003
|
To read this entire item of approximately 985 words online now in PDF format:
Click here to read this item if you are an existing subscriber to this publication.
Click here to purchase the full text of this item to read now (price: $25).
To subscribe to this publication and immediately access all its archives including this item, select the relevant publication under 'Catalogue' in the left-hand column
PLEASE NOTE: to read PDFs on www.argento.com you must be using Version 5 of Acrobat Reader or Adobe Reader. If you have an earlier version you can download the latest free of charge by clicking here
|
California Appellate Court Affirms Trial Court's Ruling that "Passive Migration" Is Not a "Discharge or Release" within the Meaning of the State's Proposition 65 Statute
Consumer Advocacy Group Inc. v. Exxon Mobil Corp
In this decision, the California Court of Appeal found that "passive migration" does not constitute a "discharge or release" within the meaning of California's Proposition 65.
The information contained on this page is presented for your convenience as news and analysis. It is not intended as legal advice, nor should it be relied upon as such. Please consult an attorney for advice in your case or matter
|
Read related items on:
 Statutes - State) California) Proposition 65
Statutes - State) California) Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986
Topics) Pollution and Contamination) Benzene
Topics) Pollution and Contamination) Lead
Topics) Pollution and Contamination) Toluene
Topics) Water Quality) Safe Drinking Water Act
2nd District Court of Appeal
Consumer Advocacy Group, Inc. v. Exxon Mobil Corp.
|
