Archive for the 'Federal Environmental Law' Category

EPA lists Gowanus Canal on the National Priorities List

On March 2, 2010, the EPA listed the Gowanus Canal in Brooklyn on the National Priorities List (NPL), making it a federal Superfund site.  The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation urged EPA to consider

The District of Maine cites to the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Burlington Northern in an Arranger Liability Case

The District Court for the District of Maine relied on the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. United States, No. 07-1601, –U.S.– (U.S. May 4, 2009) (“BNSF”), in denying a motion to

The Southern District of New York cites to Burlington Northern in an Apportionment Case.

In a recent decision in In Re Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether (“MTBE”) Products Liability Litigation (“In re MTBE”), No. 00 MDL 1898, and related case City of New York v. Exxon Mobil Corporation, No. 04 Civ. 3417 (S.D.N.Y. July 14, 2009), the District Court for the Southern District of New York relied

The Supreme Court Clarifies the Requirements for “Arranger” Liability and Allocation of Liability in CERCLA Cases – Part III.

Following our recent posts on the Supreme Court’s decision in Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. United States, No. 07-1601, –U.S.– (U.S. May 4, 2009) (”BNSF“), this post will discuss the implications of

Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. United States: The Supreme Court Clarifies the Requirements for “Arranger” Liability and Allocation of Liability in CERCLA Cases – Part II.

Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. United States: The Supreme Court Clarifies the Requirements for “Arranger” Liability and Allocation of Liability in CERCLA Cases – Part II.
As discussed in our prior posting, the Supreme Court recently clarified the requirements for “arranger” liability and allocation of liability in CERCLA cases in Burlington Northern & […]

The Supreme Court Clarifies the Requirements for “Arranger” Liability and Allocation of Liability in CERCLA Cases – Part I.

Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. United States: The Supreme Court Clarifies the Requirements for “Arranger” Liability and Allocation of Liability in CERCLA Cases – Part I.
The Supreme Court recently clarified the requirements for “arranger” liability and allocation of liability in CERCLA

The Western District of Washington Leaves a PRP without a Remedy, but Upholds the Broader Policy Objectives of CERCLA.

The Western District of Washington also recently followed the holding from the Aviall case.  See Port of Tacoma v. Todd Shipyards Corp., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5884 (W.D.Wa., January 14, 2009). The Port of Tacoma sued Todd Shipyards in a contribution action under CERCLA § 113(f) for

The Second Circuit Follows the Supreme Court’s Holdings in Atlantic Research and Cooper Industries.

In a recent Second Circuit decision, W.R. Grace & Co. v. Zotos International, No.: 05-cv-2798 (March 4, 2009), the Court followed two recent Supreme Court decisions on the oft-contested issue of when and under what sections of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (“CERCLA”) (the “Superfund” statute) a potentially responsible party (“PRP”) can […]

Term Definition: Environmental Requirements

Environmental Requirements:  Traditionally the term used is “Environmental Law,” but “Requirements” is more accurate as the definition goes beyond statutes and regulations.

Term Definition: Hazardous Material

A major problem with definitions of environmental terms in commercial and real estate transaction documents is that they become overly inclusive, confusing, and unworkable.  A definition of “hazardous materials” which includes virtually every substance known to man in any amount at any concentration, will be impossible to satisfy