Tanglewood case 7 - Seldom.. possibleSave Hide Contact Print Share. Save Hide Share. What's Your Home Worth? General form error. This error applies to the full form. tanglewood case 7
Filter Our Catalogue
View Citing Opinions. CourtListener is a project of Free Law Projecta federally-recognized c 3 non-profit.
We rely on donations for our financial security. Donate Tanglewood case 7. Sign In Register. Filed: July 28th, Precedential Hanglewood Precedential. Citations: F. Docket Number: Lee, Jr. Craig D. Ball, Timothy F. In this cause we granted an interlocutory appeal under 28 U. Finding no error in that ruling, for the reasons assigned we affirm.
Please Sign In or Register
For purposes of the pending motion, we accept as true the allegations of the complaint. The other defendants against whom appellees have complained are residential developers, construction companies, and real estate agents and agencies.
The complainants-appellees are owners of property in that subdivision. The subdivision was built on the site upon which the United Creosoting Company operated a wood-treatment facility from to During that quarter century substantial amounts of highly-toxic waste accumulated on the property.
In certain of the defendants acquired the property, filled in and graded the creosote pools, and tanglewood case 7 residential development. InTanglewood tangleeood and residents complained to Texas authorities about toxic problems and all development ceased. The cleanup, expected to cost millions of dollars, will require the demolition of six homes and the construction of bunkers to contain the hazardous materials. The defendants filed a joint motion to dismiss under Fed. The district court denied the motion but certified its ruling under 28 U. First Federal sought and secured our approval of an interlocutory appeal.]