Opinion ID: 809580
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Wilkening’s Complaint

Text: Plaintiff Wilkening’s complaint alleged that Defendants breached the royalty fees contract by failing to pay Wilkening for (1) reusable or recyclable material delivered to Veolia Pecan Row’s landfill and (2) material deposited in Veolia Evergreen’s adjacent landfill. Wilkening sought damages in the form of 3 Case: 12-11852 Date Filed: 10/02/2012 Page: 4 of 10 royalty payments for material deposited in Veolia Pecan Row’s and Veolia Evergreen’s landfills. After extensive discovery, Wilkening moved for summary judgment. In response, Defendants Veolia Pecan Row and Veolia Evergreen argued: (1) that recyclable and reusable material delivered to the Pecan Row landfill is not “waste” under the royalty fees contract because it is not deposited in the landfill so as to deplete capacity; and (2) that Veolia Evergreen’s landfill is a separate landfill, rather than an “expansion” of Veolia Pecan Row’s landfill within the meaning of the royalty fees contract.2