Kotrous

Kotrous v. Goss-Jewett Co. of Northern California, Inc.

Good Law
523 F.3d 924
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 16, 200806-15162, 06-16019California4,348 words

Opinion

Opinion

Tashima, J.

We are required to consider the continued viability of Pinal Creek Group v. Newmont Mining Corp., 118 F.3d 1298 (9th Cir.1997), in light of the Supreme Court’s most recent precedent addressing the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 9601-9675 (“CERCLA”). Sections 107 and 113(f) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. §§ 9607 and 9613, “allow private parties to recover expenses associated with cleaning up contaminated sites.” United States v. Atl. Research Corp., — U.S. -, 127 S.Ct. 2331, 2333 , 168 L.Ed.2d 28 (2007). In Atlantic Research, the Supreme Court held that § 107(a) .provides “so-called potentially responsible parties (PRPs) ... with a cause of action to recover costs from other PRPs,” id. at 2334, whereas § 113 provides an action for contribution. In so holding, the Court undermined Pinal Creek’s holding that § 107 entitles PRPs to seek only contribution, not cost recovery, from other PRPs. To the extent, therefore, that Pinal Creek conflicts with Atlantic Research, we conclude that Pinal Creek has been overruled.

This opinion addresses two separate appeals, in separate actions, seeking recovery of costs associated with the clean-up of…

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.