The Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit has long struggled with interpreting the scope of CERCLA liability, often issuing poorly-reasoned and inconsistent decisions. This trend continued with its recent opinion in Von Duprin vs Moran Electric Service, Inc., et al, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 26726 (7th Cir. 9/3/2021) where the court issued a number […]
A federal district court ruled that methane migrating from a closed landfill to a residential development project constitutes an imminent and substantial endangerment under section 7002 of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act in Marcas, L.L.C. v. Bd. of County Comm’rs,2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 104380 (D.Md. 7/25/13). The court also followed an emerging trend and
Last year, we criticized the ruling in Stratford Holdings LLC v Fog Cap Retail Investors LLC where the district court for the southern district court of Georgia appeared to conflate reporting obligation of section 103 of CERCLA with the cost recovery and contribution provisions of CERCLA when the court granted a motion to dismiss by the defendant
4th Circuit Allows Landlord Cost Recovery To Proceed Read More »
We have previously reported on how disposal of fill material tends not to be well-regulated. During the real estate bubble demand for aggregate was at a premium. Due to the scarcity and cost of aggregate or fill material, contractors often use pulverized construction debris from other construction sites as fill material. Despite the fact that
Consultant Unable To Escape NJ Contaminated Fill Case Read More »
We have previously discussed the risks posed by residential heating oil tanks in a number of posts covering cases in New York , New Jersey , Oregon, Washington, Mass and Canada. Three recent cases in New Jerseyall involve claims of inadequate disclosure of heating oil illustrate. In Dalton v Shanna Lynn Corp., 2012 N.J. Super. Unpub. LEXIS 874 (App. Div. 4/19/12)
Trio of NJ Cases Are Cautionary Tales For Home Heating Oil Tanks Read More »
In the 1980s and 1990s, judges usually began CERCLA cases discussing that CERCLA was a remedial statute that Congress intended to be broadly construed. Judges seemed afraid of the problem of toxic wastes and often uncritically accepted government arguments that cast a wide liability net that caught a wide range of defendants. Even in private
NY District Court Misconstrues CERCLA “Facility” Definition Read More »
In U.S. v. NCR Corp., 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 16097 (7th Cir. 8/3/12) the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit declined to adopt the Third Restatement of Torts reflecting a national trend away from joint liability. This ruling seems to fly in the face of the legislative history of the Comprehensive Environmental
7th Circuit Declines To Apply Third Restatement of Torts in Apportionment Case Read More »
Ameripride Services. v. Valley Indus. Services, 2011U.S. Dist. LEXIS 55634 (E.D.Ca. 5/12/11) discussed how delays or failure to comply with CERCLA reporting requirements may impact a claim for contribution or cost recovery. In this case, Texas Eastern Overseas, Inc (TEO) conducted industrial dry cleaning at a facility until 1983 when it sold the property to
Hobart Corp v Waste Management of Ohio, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 148224 (S.D.Ohio 2/10/11) is an obscure decision from 2011 but has some complaint drafting lessons. This case started off as a classic CERCLA contribution action for a landfill cleanup. The plaintiff entered into a settlement with EPA to perform an RI/FS and then decides
No Arranger Liability For Migration of Contaminated Groundwater Read More »
From a purely legal standpoint, the recent ruling In Tennessee v. Roane Holdings Ltd., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 143703 (E.D.TN 12/14/11) was not unusual. The court ruled on a motion to dismiss that a party who had entered into an administrative order on consent could not bring a cost recovery action under CERCLA section 107
Acquisitions Bring CERCLA Liability to Banking Conglomerate Read More »