Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 11 FEBRUARY 2019

Bad Superfund Judging — Like, Saints/Rams Bad

I hold the attorneys for the State of Ohio responsible for this travesty.

United StatesEnvironment

Last month's decision in Ohio v. Breen was the most blatantly, obviously, and incontrovertibly wrong Superfund decision I have ever come across. How wrong was it? Saints/Rams level wrong.

The case involved Superfund claims brought by the state of Ohio concerning a former pesticide operation. The State sued numerous people, including the current owner of property that had been contaminated as the result of the pesticide operations. The owner argued that it was not liable. It did not assert an innocent landowner defense. It did not assert an "all appropriate inquiry defense." Nope. Its argument was simple. It asserted that a court may not impose liability under § 107(a)(1) of CERCLA unless a person is both an owner and an operator. And the Court agreed.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See more popular content from