ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
March 16,
1995
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,
)
Complainant,
v.
)
PCB 94—288
(Enforcement
—
Air)
GRAYSLAKE GELATIN COMPANY, an
)
Illinois corporation; BLIDCO,
INC.,)
an Illinois corporation; ACME
)
CONSTRUCTION CO.,
INC.,
an Illinois)
corporation; and DIVERSIFIED
)
ABATEMENT CONTRACTORS INC.,
an
)
Illinois corporation,
Respondents.
ORDER OF THE BOARD
(by E.
Dunham):
This matter comes before the Board on a “Motion for Summary
Judgment” filed by Grayslake Gelatin Company
(Grayslake)
on
February 8,
1995.
Grayslake seeks summary judgment on Counts IV
and V on the basis that Grayslake did not own the property where
the alleged offense took place at the time alleged in the
complaint.
Grayslake included a copy of the deed conveying the
property and an affidavit from its president in support of its
motion for summary judgment.
Complainant filed a “Request to
Defer Consideration of Respondent’s Motion for Summary Judgment”
on February 16,
1995.
Grayslake filed a response to the motion
to defer consideration on February 17,
1995.
Complainant requests that the Board delay consideration of
the motion for summary judgment to allow the complainant to
investigate the factual allegations in the motion for summary
judgment.
Complainant requests that the Board delay
consideration until after discovery has been taken.
Respondent Grayslake states that by failing to deny the
facts contained in respondent’s affidavit,
the facts must be
considered admitted.
Complainant states that, without further
discovery,
the affidavit of respondent cannot be admitted or
denied.
The Board finds that
a material fact regarding the location
of the alleged violation relative to the property line remains in
dispute.
The Board finds that the affidavit and deed provided by
respondent are not dispositive on the issue of the relationship
of the lot line to the place of the alleged violation.
Therefore, the motion for summary judgment
is denied.
Having
2
denied the motion for summary judgment, the complainant’s motion
for an extension of time to file a reply is moot.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
I, Dorothy M. Gunn,
Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control
Board, hereby certify that the above order was adopted on
~
day of
______________,
1995,
by a vote of
_______
~
/L
Dorothy M. 4nn,
Clexfk
Illinois Pô~JLutionControl Board