California Environmental Law Attorneys

» Environmental Litigation

State Law Claims by Private PRP Are Not Preempted by CERCLA § 107 Claim, at Least Initially

On March 18, a New York federal district court held that a company seeking to recoup the response costs it incurred cleaning up contamination at a former chemical plant initially may maintain state law claims as well as a cost recovery claim under CE… Read More

Ninth Circuit Affirms Dismissal of Subrogated Claims Brought Under CERCLA Sections 107(a) and 112(c), as well as State Law Theories

By Tiffany Hedgpeth and Michael Einhorn On March 15, 2013, the Ninth Circuit held in Chubb Custom Ins. Co. v. Space Systems/Loral, Inc., Case No. 11-16272, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 5198 (9th Cir., March 15, 2013), that the insurer Chubb Custom Insurance… Read More

Supreme Court denies petition by Solutia, Inc. to address whether a party to a consent decree may file a cost recovery action under CERCLA Section 107(a).

On October 9, 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court denied the petition of Solutia, Inc. and Pharmacia Corporation to review a March 6, 2012 ruling by the Eleventh Circuit which affirmed a grant of summary judgment and held that parties subject to a consent d… Read More

Federal Court’s Dismissal of Buyer’s Fraud Action in Allegedly Contaminated Gas Station Sale Highlights the Need for Land Purchasers to Conduct Independent Environmental Assessments

A Washington federal district court denied purchaser Pyramid Gold, Inc.’s claim that it was misled as to the level of contamination present at the gas station it purchased from BP West Coast Products, LLC. Pyramid Gold agreed to the sale after rece… Read More

Federal Court Dismisses CERCLA Suit based on Lack of Necessary Response Costs

By Clare Bienvenu & John D. Edgcomb In Stratford Holding, LLC v. Fog Cap Retail Investors, et al., Stratford Holding LLC (“Stratford”) sued its lessees, Fog Cap Retail Investors LLC (“Fog Cap”) and Foot Locker Retail Inc. (“Foot Locker… Read More

California Bill Limiting Deposition Time Set to Take Effect January 1, 2013

This week Governor Jerry Brown signed A.B. 1875 into law, adding Section 2025.290 to the California Code of Civil Procedure. The law, which will take effect on January 1, 2013, requires that many depositions be limited to seven hours in total. While… Read More

Federal District Court Allows Chevron to Proceed with a CERCLA § 107 Cost Recovery Action to Attempt to Hold Non-Settling “Smaller Responsible Parties” Jointly and Severally Liable for All Response Costs

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of California denied defendants’ motion to dismiss in Chevron’s CERCLA § 107 cost recovery action against them in connection with the EPC Eastside Disposal Facility site outside of Bakers… Read More

California Supreme Court Invalidates the Last Vestiges of the Common Law Release Rule – Plaintiffs May Recover the Unsatisfied Portion of All Awarded Damages from Nonsettling Joint Tortfeasors, Even in the Absence of a Good Faith Settlement

Until the California Supreme Court’s recent ruling in Leung v. Verdugo Hills Hospital, S192768, the common law release rule was technically still good law in California. Yet, the rule has long lain dormant due to jurisprudence and legislation that… Read More

State of California v. Continental Insurance: California Supreme Court Ruling Paves the Way for “Stacking” Multiple Insurance Policy Limits in Response to Certain Environmental Cleanup Claims

On August 9, 2012, in State of California v. Continental Insurance, S170506, the California Supreme Court applied the “all sums-with-stacking” rule to allow the State of California to “stack” the policy limits of several successive insurance… Read More

Oregon District Court holds that NEPA requires further analysis of cumulative impacts in use of herbicides for controlling invasive species under Forest Service management plan.

In League of Wilderness Defenders/Blue Mountains Biodiversity Project v. United States Forest Service, No. 3:10-CV-01397-SI (D. Ore. Jun. 29, 2012)[link to PDF available here], the District Court for the District of Oregon – Portland Division consi… Read More