We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
In cooperation with Association of Corporate Counsel
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 22

Surprising but welcome: California federal court finds that botched cleanup may create CERCLA liability for California's Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC)

  • Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 23 2014

In California Department of Toxic Substances Control v. Jim Dobbas, Inc., et al, 2014 WL 4627248 (E.D. Cal. Sept. 16, 2014), the United States

Bona fide prospective purchaser defense rejected by Fourth Circuit because purchaser did not exercise appropriate care after closing

  • Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 8 2013

An owner of real property claiming the bona fide prospective purchaser (BFPP) defense under Section 107(r)(1) of CERCLA has the burden of

Stormwater flow not a “pollutant” under Clean Water Act and EPA may not regulate it as a surrogate, federal court holds

  • Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • January 8 2013

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia recently granted judgment on the pleadings against EPA and held that EPA lacked the

Wisconsin Federal Court follows Ninth Circuit's support of CERCLA useful product defense: knowledge is not enough to trigger arranger liability

  • Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • July 16 2012

After a sevenday bench trial, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin upheld the CERCLA useful product defense

Ohio EPA's 10 ton per year de minimis emission BAT exemption upheld by Sixth Circuit

  • Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 29 2012

The United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit recently dismissed the challenges brought by the Sierra Club to Ohio EPA's 10 ton per year de minimis exemption for Best Available Technology (BAT) analysis

Wisconsin federal court reverses itself: no CERCLA liability under asset purchase agreement

  • Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 16 2012

On January 4, 2012, we reported to you my view that the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin “could not have been more wrong” in finding that an Asset Purchase Agreement (APA) imposed direct CERCLA liability on the purchaser

Post-script to article: U.S. v. NCR: California District Court says not so fast to successor liability under APA

  • Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • January 9 2012

We reported to you last week about the questionable December 19, 2011 decision of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin in U.S. v. NCR Corp., which held that an Asset Purchase Agreement (APA) created CERCLA liability because of “noncompliance” with CERCLA Section 107(a

Draftsmen beware: CERCLA can impose liability on buyers under asset purchase agreements, says Wisconsin federal court

  • Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • January 4 2012

On December 19, 2011, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin denied defendant Appleton Paper’s Motion for Summary Judgment that sought a determination that Appleton was not liable to the United States pursuant to the cost-recovery provisions of CERCLA Section 107(a

Rapanos wetlands confusion: Third Circuit accentuates the circuit split

  • Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • November 4 2011

When the United States Supreme Court issued its wetlands defining decision in Rapanos v. United States, environmental practitioners, real estate developers, and consultants believed that boundaries would be set for determining when a wetland was regulated under the Clean Water Act

Vermont Supreme Court upholds summary judgment for defendants on benzene exposure toxic tort claims

  • Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • August 26 2011

The Vermont Supreme Court upheld summary judgment in favor of defendants, including Goodyear, in a toxic tort lawsuit in which a 49 year-old plaintiff alleged he contracted non-Hodgkins lymphoma from his exposure during years of childhood play on a ballfield allegedly contaminated with benzene