Hazardous Waste Case Before Supreme Court

Lawyer Blogs

[##_1L|1174705272.jpg|width="180" height="122" alt=""|_##]The Supreme Court is scheduled to consider an environmental case Monday that could make it easier for many industrial companies to recover some of the millions of dollars they've spent cleaning up hazardous waste sites. The case involves the 1980 federal environmental law, known as "Superfund," that set up a process for rehabilitating polluted industrial areas. Under the law, if the Environmental Protection Agency sues a company to force it to clean up a site, that company can then sue other parties that contributed to the pollution for a share of the cleanup costs.

But lower federal courts have disagreed about what happens if a company voluntarily chooses to clean up a site: can it sue other companies, or the U.S. government, to recover costs? Or does the Superfund law require a company to be sued by the EPA first, before it can take action against other parties?

The U.S. government has taken the latter position. The Bush administration argued in court filings that requiring companies to be sued by the EPA before they can recover costs from other entities encourages companies to settle with the government.

There "is little evidence that...Congress," when it enacted the Superfund law, "intended to promote unsupervised cleanups at the expense of government-supervised cleanups pursuant to a settlement or suit," the Solicitor General, the government's lawyer, wrote.

Environmentalists and several U.S. business groups respond that such an interpretation would discourage companies from initiating their own cleanups. The EPA is stretched too thin to oversee the rehabilitation of every site, a coalition of business groups wrote in a court brief.

The case before the court Monday stems from a lawsuit filed by Atlantic Research Corp. in 2002. Atlantic Research retrofitted rocket motors under contract with the U.S. government in the 1980s at an industrial park in Camden, Ark., according to court filings.

Rocket propellant contaminated the industrial park as a result of the work, and the company voluntarily cleaned up the pollution. It then sued the federal government in 2002 to recover some of the costs.

A district court sided with the government, but the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Atlantic could proceed with its suit. The government then appealed to the Supreme Court.

Several business groups, including the Superfund Settlements Project and trade associations representing the chemical, oil, and utilities industries, signed onto a brief supporting Atlantic Research. The Superfund Settlements Project represents 10 corporations, including General Electric Co. and United Technologies Corp., that have spent $6 billion on hazardous waste cleanups, the group's lawyer said.

Related listings

  • Supreme Court looking at passenger rights

    Supreme Court looking at passenger rights

    Lawyer Blogs 04/24/2007

    [##_1L|1318636043.jpg|width="130" height="130" alt=""|_##]The US Supreme Court heard oral arguments Monday in Brendlin v. California, 06-8120, in which the Court must determine whether an automobile passenger, convicted on drug charges resulting from...

  • Hinson Not Guilty In Dungeon Rape Case

    Hinson Not Guilty In Dungeon Rape Case

    Lawyer Blogs 04/23/2007

    [##_1L|1356166350.jpg|width="120" height="88" alt=""|_##]A South Carolina jury has found a convicted sex offender not guilty of raping two teenage girls in an underground room he built behind his house. Kenneth Hinson had been charged with kidnapping...

  • OCA outraged by racist talk on CBS radio

    OCA outraged by racist talk on CBS radio

    Lawyer Blogs 04/23/2007

    The Organization of Chinese Americans (OCA) on Sunday expressed outrage over a recent CBS radio segment, which it described as "racist, vulgar and sexist." WFNY 92.3 Free FM, which is part of CBS Radio, aired twice a segment of a talk show involving ...

Illinois Work Injury Lawyers – Krol, Bongiorno & Given, LTD.

Accidents in the workplace are often caused by unsafe work conditions arising from ignoring safety rules, overlooking maintenance or other negligence of those in management. While we are one of the largest firms in Illinois dedicated solely to the representation of injured workers, we pride ourselves on the personal, one-on-one approach we deliver to each client.

Work accidents can cause serious injuries and sometimes permanent damage. Some extremely serious work injuries can permanently hinder a person’s ability to get around and continue their daily duties. Factors that affect one’s quality of life such as place of work, relationships with friends and family, and social standing can all be taken away quickly by a work injury. Although, you may not be able to recover all of your losses, you may be entitled to compensation as a result of your work injury. Krol, Bongiorno & Given, LTD. provides informed advocacy in all kinds of workers’ compensation claims, including:

• Injuries to the back and neck, including severe spinal cord injuries
• Serious head injuries
• Heart problems resulting from workplace activities
• Injuries to the knees, elbows, shoulders and other joints
• Injuries caused by repetitive movements

For Illinois Workers’ Compensation claims, you will ALWAYS cheat yourself if you do not hire an experienced attorney. When you hire Krol, Bongiorno & Given, Ltd, you will have someone to guide you through the process, and when it is time to settle, we will add value to your case IN EXCESS of our fee. In the last few years, employers and insurance carriers have sought to advance the argument that when you settle a case without an attorney, your already low settlement should be further reduced by 20% so that you do not get a “windfall.” Representing yourself in Illinois is a lose-lose proposition.

Business News

New York & New Jersey Family Law Matters We represent our clients in all types of proceedings that include termination of parental rights. >> read