Task: Wrong Candidate Generation
Input (English): 20, 2006 Trial Test, of James Keeling. 79 . Vine St. Exhibit 104 (J. Keeling 07/12/05 Dep. at 28). 80 . Mar. 20, 2006 Trial Test, of James Keeling; Vine St. Exhibit 40 at 001947. 81 . Mar. 20, 2006 Trial Test, of James Keeling; Vine St. Exhibit 104 (J. Keeling 07/12/05 Dep. at 38-39, 58). 82 . Mar. 20, 2006 Trial Test, of James Keeling; Vine St. Exhibit 104 (J. Keeling 07/12/05 Dep. at 62, 67). 83 . Mar. 20, 2006 Trial Test, of James Keeling. 84 . Id.; Vine St. Exhibit 104 (J. Keeling 7/12/05 Dep. at 64-65, 67-78). 85 . Mar. 20, 2006 Trial Test, of 589, 596 n. 12, 598 (S.D.Tex.1996) (indicating but not directly holding that the arranger need not have owned or possessed the substance); United States v. Iron Mountain Mines, Inc., 881 F.Supp. 1432, 1451 (E.D.Cal.1995) {"Iron Mountain I") (<HOLDING>). 100 . New York v. Shore Realty Corp., 759 
 Holding statements: (A) holding that defendant had standing to challenge the seizure of a box regardless of who owned it because it was in a house owned and possessed by defendant (B) holding without discussion that a cercla arranger must own or possess the hazardous substance at issue (C) holding authority to control limits duty to control (D) holding that defendant was potentially liable as an arranger when it discharged hazardous substances into a river (E) holding that an arranger must have owned or possessed or had the authority to control or duty to dispose of  the hazardous materials at issue
Output (English): holding that defendant was potentially liable as an arranger when it discharged hazardous substances into a river