Search Results
Use the filters on the left-hand side of this screen to refine the results further by topic or document type.

Chemical Mfrs. Ass'n v. Department of Transp.

The court holds that the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) acted within the scope of its discretion in issuing a regulation that established a rebuttable presumption that loose closures on railroad tank cars transporting hazardous materials result from the shipper's failure to conduct a proper...

Shell Oil Co. v. United States

The Court of Federal Claims awarded $84 million to four oil companies for costs they incurred cleaning up waste stemming from the production of aviation gasoline during World War II under contracts with the U.S. government. The government argued that the oil companies are not entitled to recover all...

Kennedy Bldg. Assocs. v. CBS Corp.

The Eighth Circuit affirmed a lower court order holding that a company substantially complied with a state's remediation plan for cleaning up PCB contamination at a hazardous waste site. The company's predecessor-in-interest operated an electrical transformer repair facility on the subject property,...

New Jersey v. Gloucester Envtl. Management Servs., Inc.

A district court denied New Jersey's motion to amend a 1997 consent decree concerning the Gloucester Environmental Management Services, Inc., landfill and ordered it to comply with the terms of the decree. The state alleged that the detection of the presence of radionuclides requires a new remedy fo...

Fisher v. Ciba Specialty Chems. Corp.

A district ruled on several pre-trial motions of both defendants and plaintiffs alleging property damage caused by a defendant's contamination at its nearby chemical manufacturing facility (a designated Superfund site), negligence, fraud, fraudulent concealment, strict liability, trespass, and civil...

When Is a Transporter an Arranger Under CERCLA?

In New York v. SCA Services, Inc., the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York rejected the notion that a transporter cannot be an arranger under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). This Dialogue reviews the parties' arguments and the court's opinion. It then analyzes the impact this case will have on transporters.

<i>Garamendi</i>'s Unspoken Assumptions: Assessing Executive Foreign Affairs Preemption Challenges to State Regulation of Greenhouse Gas Emissions

Editor's Summary: In 2003, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its most recent pronouncement on the executive foreign affairs preemption doctrine in American Insurance Ass'n v. Garamendi. In this Article, Kimberly Breedon argues that lower courts are prone to overbroad applications of Garamendi because the Court assumed the presence of three elements when it developed the standard for executive foreign affairs preemption of state law: (1) formal source law; (2) nexus to a foreign entity; and (3) indication of intent by the executive to preempt the state law under challenge.

Centerior Serv. Co. v. Acme Scrap Iron & Metal Corp.

The court holds that potentially responsible parties (PRPs) compelled to initiate a hazardous waste site cleanup are precluded from joint and several cost recovery from other PRPs under Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) §107(a), and, thus, are limited to...

Boeing Co. v. Cascade Corp.

The court holds that when a party is liable for pollution response costs under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), it must share them regardless of whether it is the sole cause of the costs. An airplane manufacturer brought a contribution action agains...

Chemical Leaman Tank Lines, Inc. v. Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co.

The court reverses and remands a district court's allocation of insurance coverage costs between an insured and its excess insurers for soil, groundwater, and wetlands contamination at the insured's tank truck terminal. The court first holds that the district court had subject matter jurisdiction ov...