Cooper Industries, LLC v. Toastmaster Inc. et al

Filing 145

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that no later than noon on Monday, October 29, 2018, Spectrum shall file a memorandum with the Court explaining the effect of the Consent Judgment and Judge Autrey's rulings in Spectrum Br ands, Inc. v. Compton's LLC, et. al, Cause Number 2:16 CV 30 HEA, on this case, including the preclusive effect, if any, of the summary judgment ruling and Consent Judgment, and also setting out the basis for this Court's continued jurisdic tion over its counterclaims as a live case or controversy, including but not limited to, the CERCLA claims. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Cooper may file an opposition to the memorandum no later than noon on Monday, November 5, 2018. IT IS FURTHER ORD ERED that these memoranda shall not exceed 15 pages in length. No additional briefing will be permitted, so the parties shall include all relevant arguments and legal authorities in their respective memoranda. Signed by District Judge Catherine D. Perry on October 19, 2018. (MCB)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
NORTHERN DIVISION
COOPER INDUSTRIES, LLC,
Plaintiff,
vs.
SPECTRUM BRANDS, INC.,
Defendant/Counter Plaintiff,
vs.
COOPER INDUSTRIES, LLC, et al.,
Counter Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 2:16 CV 39 CDP

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
In 1980, the predecessor of plaintiff Cooper (McGraw Edison) sold some
property and plant sites to the predecessor of defendant Spectrum Brands, Inc.
(Toastmaster)1 under an Asset Purchase Agreement.2 One of these plants is
located in Macon, Missouri. After the sale, environmental contamination was
discovered at the Macon site and remediation began.

1

Toastmaster was dismissed as a defendant pursuant to a joint stipulation filed by the parties on
September 29, 2016 [Doc. # 39].
2

As the parties agree that Cooper now holds all the rights and responsibilities of McGraw Edison
and Spectrum holds all the rights and responsibilities of Toastmaster under the agreement, for
ease of reference I will substitute Cooper for McGraw Edison and Spectrum for Toastmaster in
this Memorandum and Order.

At issue in this case is who ultimately bears the cleanup costs for the Macon
site under the terms of the agreement. Spectrum sold the Macon site and the
liability for the cleanup costs to third party Compton’s LLC (CLLC) in 2011.
CLLC “assumed all environmental obligations and agreed to perform all
environmental remediation associated with the Macon site.” Spectrum Brands,
Inc. v. Compton’s LLC, et. al, Cause Number 2:16 CV 30 HEA (E.D. Mo. Aug. 21,
2018) [Doc. # 93 in Cause Number 2: 16 CV 30 HEA]. Richard Compton
personally guaranteed CLLC’s obligations under the agreement. Id.
Spectrum eventually sued CLLC and Compton in a separate lawsuit filed in
this Court over their assumption of the environmental liabilities. Spectrum Brands,
Inc. v. Compton’s LLC, et. al, Cause Number 2:16 CV 30 HEA. The presiding
judge in that case, the Honorable Henry E. Autrey, granted summary judgment in
favor of Spectrum, ruling as a matter of law that CLLC and Cooper were
responsible for the environmental cleanup costs at the Macon site. [Doc. # 93 in
Cause Number 2: 16 CV 30 HEA]. That ruling eventually led to the entry of a
Consent Judgment, which entered judgment against CLLC and Cooper and in
favor of Spectrum in the amount of $1.7 million dollars, which purports to be the
costs incurred by Spectrum to remediate the Macon site. [Doc. # 98 in Cause
Number 2:16 CV 30 HEA]. These appear to be the same costs being sought by
Spectrum in this case.
2

Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that no later than noon on Monday, October
29, 2018, Spectrum shall file a memorandum with the Court explaining the effect
of the Consent Judgment and Judge Autrey’s rulings in Spectrum Brands, Inc. v.
Compton’s LLC, et. al, Cause Number 2:16 CV 30 HEA, on this case, including
the preclusive effect, if any, of the summary judgment ruling and Consent
Judgment, and also setting out the basis for this Court’s continued jurisdiction over
its counterclaims as a live case or controversy, including but not limited to, the
CERCLA claims.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Cooper may file an opposition to the
memorandum no later than noon on Monday, November 5, 2018.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that these memoranda shall not exceed 15
pages in length. No additional briefing will be permitted, so the parties shall
include all relevant arguments and legal authorities in their respective memoranda.

CATHERINE D. PERRY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated this 19th day of October, 2018.

3