On November 4, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal of a fourth circuit case finding that joint and several liability is the appropriate standard under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act. The Court did not reject the Divisibility of Harm Standard established in Burlington N. & Santa Fe R.R. Co. v. United States; rather, it clarified what factors must be present in order for the court to apply a Divisibility of Harm Standard in apportioning liability. The court held that in order for there to be a “reasonable basis” for apportionment, the parties must be able to demonstrate the amount of contamination each party contributed to the site, and (2) the amount of soil each liable party caused to become contaminated through secondary disposal at the site.
Register now for your free, tailored, daily legal newsfeed service.
Questions? Please contact firstname.lastname@example.orgRegister
Supreme Court declines to review Fourth Circuit case rejecting allocation of harm arguement
Popular articles from this firm
If you would like to learn how Lexology can drive your content marketing strategy forward, please email email@example.com.
Related topic hubs
Bed Bath & Beyond Inc
"I am a regular reader of Lexology, as are a few of my colleagues. I find the email newsfeed useful and of good quality, and in some cases directly on point with issues of concern to the company. It is important to stay current with legal developments, and the articles are a great aid toward this goal. The ability to access the articles without cost is critical and I hope Lexology continues with the good work."