Following the reasoning of the Supreme Court in Connecticut v. American Electric Power Co., Inc. (AEP), 546 U.S. ___ (No. 10-174, S. Ct. 2011), the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington ruled in January that federal common law nuisance claims filed by Washington residents living downstream and downwind of a Canadian metal smelter and fertilizer manufacturing facility must be dismissed, because CERCLA displaces the federal common law of nuisance. Barbara Anderson, et al. v. Teck Metals, 2015 BL 1624 (E.D. Wash. No. 13-CV-420, 1/5/15). Former and current residents of Northport, Washington filed a class action alleging that air… Read more
Tag: contamination
Sixth Circuit Holds That Settling PRPs at Superfund Sites Are Limited to Contribution Claims Against Other PRPs
The interplay of two remedies for recovery by Potentially Responsible Parties (PRPs) of their cleanup costs at contaminated sites has been a lively topic of debate ever since Congress added Section 113(f) in 1986, clarifying the right of parties held jointly and severally liable for cleanup costs to seek recovery of a share of those costs from other PRPs who had not contributed toward cleanup. In 2007, the Supreme Court in United States v. Atlantic Research Corp. held that both Section 113 contribution claims and the pre-existing remedy under Section 107 for cost recovery were available to PRPs, depending on… Read more