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

Wednesday, January 13th, 2010

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 (more…)

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

Wednesday, December 9th, 2009

Following our posts 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”), this post will discuss implications of this decision on apportionment in Superfund cases as various commentators (including this one) see it. (more…)

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

Friday, November 13th, 2009

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 (more…)

New York State Court of Appeals Makes Significant SEQRA Standing Ruling

Wednesday, October 28th, 2009

On October 27, 2009 the New York State Court of Appeals made the most important decision regarding standing in SEQRA cases in perhaps the last 18 years.  The court ruled in Save the Pine Bush v. Common Council of City of Albany, that standing to challenge the environmental impact of a (more…)

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.

Monday, August 31st, 2009

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 & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. United States, No. 07-1601, –U.S.– (U.S. May 4, 2009).  That post set forth the facts and procedural history of the case; this post discusses the Supreme Court’s holding. (more…)

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

Thursday, July 9th, 2009

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 (more…)

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

Tuesday, May 26th, 2009

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 (more…)

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

Tuesday, May 19th, 2009

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 recover (more…)

The Third Department upholds jury award of $6,325,000 in penalties in an oil spill case

Friday, May 8th, 2009

On February 10, 2009, the Appellate Division, Third Department, upheld a jury award of $6,325,000 in penalties against three defendants – property owner, gas supplier and station operator (more…)

The Second Department Overturns a Jury Award of Stigma Damages in Oil Spill Case

Monday, May 4th, 2009

In a recent oil spill case under the Navigation Law, an intermediate state appeals court, the Appellate Division of the State Supreme Court, Second Department overturned a $225,000 jury award of “stigma” damages (plus $61,600 fees award) to a private homeowner for devaluation of his property values – not for clean-up costs – due to (more…)

Periconi Blog Home Visit www.periconi.com Attorney Profiles Contact Us
  • Subscribe in Google Reader
  • Syndicate this site using RSS
  • The latest comments to all posts in RSS
  • Add to My Yahoo!
  • Add to My MSN
  • Subscribe in NewsGator Online
  • Add your feed to Newsburst from CNET News.com
  • Subscribe with Bloglines