JUDICIAL DEVELOPMENTS

August 2006

To read this entire item of approximately 1025 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

Litigant’s Failure to Explicitly Raise an Issue Before the District Court Is Foreclosed from Raising the Issue for the First Time on Appeal
Esso Standard Oil Company v. Carlos E. Rodriguez-Perez, ___F.3d___

Esso Standard Oil (Esso) sued Carlos Rodriguez-Perez and other defendants under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Defendants filed state law counterclaims. On summary judgment, the magistrate judge the parties consented to dismissed defendants’ counterclaims with prejudice. While Esso’s claims were still pending, the United States Supreme Court issues its ruling in Cooper Industries, Inc. v. Aviall Services, Inc.