City of Los Angeles v. San Pedro Boat Works

Good Law
635 F.3d 440·2011 WL 855858·2011 A.M.C. 2303·41 Envtl. L. Rep. (Envtl. Law Inst.) 20117·72 ERC (BNA) 1914
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 14, 201108-56163California7,191 words

Opinion

Opinion

Bea, J.

This case calls on us to determine, in the first instance, whether the holder of a revocable permit to use real property is an “owner” of that real property for purposes of imposing liability under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (“CERCLA”) for the cleanup of hazardous substances disposed on that property by others. A common sense reading of the statute and existing state law persuade us that this permittee, as the holder of a possessory interest, cannot be such an “owner” under CERCLA, and we so hold.

The City of Los Angeles (“the City”) appeals from the district court’s grant of partial summary judgment in favor of BCI Coca-Cola Bottling Company of Los Angeles (“BCI Coca-Cola”). The City sued BCI Coca-Cola on ten counts arising from environmental contamination caused by operation of the San Pedro Boat Works located at Berth 44 in the Port of Los Angeles (“Berth 44”). The City seeks reimbursement for the expense of cleaning up hazardous substances disposed of at Berth 44. The parties do not dispute whether hazardous substances were released at Berth 44; they were. The disagreement is over who should pay the clean-up…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.