United States v. Federal Resources Corp.

Good Law
767 F.3d 873·2014 WL 4549002·44 Envtl. L. Rep. (Envtl. Law Inst.) 20208·79 ERC (BNA) 1097·2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 17923
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 16, 201412-36065California2,320 words

Opinion

Opinion

Murguia, J.

This case concerns the district court’s obligations in reviewing a settlement made pursuant to the provisions of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (“CERCLA”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 9601-75 , that authorize the United States to settle with a potentially responsible party (“PRP”) for an amount less than that PRP’s proportionate share of the cost to clean up a polluted site if it has a limited ability to pay. See 42 U.S.C. §§ 9622 (e)(3)(A), (f)(6)(B). The Coeur d’Alenes Company (“CDA”) entered into such a settlement with the government, and the district court approved it over the objections of intervenor Federal Resources Corporation (“FRC”) that the district court was required to conduct a comparative fault analysis and to scrutinize more closely the government’s assessment of CDA’s ability to pay. We affirm.

I

In 2011, the United States filed lawsuits against FRC and CDA, among other PRPs, in the District of Idaho to recover the cost of hazardous waste clean-up efforts at the Conjecture Mine Site in Bonner County, Idaho (the “Site”). The government proceeded against both parties under CERCLA, which “imposes strict liability on certain…

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.