Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 20 JULY 2009

U.S. Supreme Court Narrows CERCLA "Arranger" Definition

On May 4, 2009, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down an important decision under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act ("CERCLA"), in the case of Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway Co. v. United States (Shell Oil Co.).

United StatesEnvironment
Ralph Swanson
Ralph Swanson
Miles Dolinger
Miles Dolinger

On May 4, 2009, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down an important decision under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act ("CERCLA"), in the case of Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway Co. v. United States (Shell Oil Co.). The Court held that Shell Oil had no liability for soil and groundwater contamination cleanup costs under CERCLA as an "arranger" for "disposal" of hazardous substances merely by selling a pesticide to a user with knowledge that the user was a careless operator that caused spills and leaks during transfer and storage. In the second part of the opinion, the Supreme Court affirmed the District Court's judgment apportioning liability for 9% of the total cleanup costs to the several railroad companies that owned a portion of the property on which the user operated.

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.

See more popular content from