Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

VIDEO · 27 MAY 2021

I Love It When SCOTUS Reminds Me How Clear And Unambiguous CERCLA Is

Yesterday, the Supreme Court ruled that only settlements that explicitly resolve liability under CERCLA trigger the contribution provisions of section 113 of CERCLA.

United StatesEnvironment

Yesterday, the Supreme Court ruled that only settlements that explicitly resolve liability under CERCLA trigger the contribution provisions of section 113 of CERCLA. I have previously commented on the Court's tendency to treat CERCLA as much more straightforward and unambiguous than practitioners have understood it to be. The Court's approach to section 113 in yesterday's decision followed this now well-worn path. In a short, sweet, and unanimous decision, the Court found that:

The most natural reading of§113(f)(3)(B) is that a party may seek contribution under CERCLA only after settling a CERCLA-specific liability, as opposed to resolving environmental liability under some other law.

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