Posted on Oct 23, 2015
In 1994, an oil and gas company (Company A) sold a pipeline to Company B, which has owned and operated it since. During the sale, the companies entered into a Purchase and Sale of Assets Agreement whereby the parties agreed that any contamination occurring before the agreement’s closing date would be Company A’s responsibility and any contamination after the closing date would be Company B’s responsibility. They also agreed that if the impact of any contamination occurring after the closing date exceeded a certain threshold, that Company B would bear responsibility for...
Continue Reading
Posted on Oct 21, 2015
Last week, the Second Circuit issued a summary order affirming a judgment of a district court involving the terms of a pollution and remediation liability policy. The policy denied coverage for loss “based upon or arising out of the existence of any underground storage tank(s) and associated piping” except for certain specified tanks and piping that was listed on an endorsement to the policy. In 2009, the insured discovered an underground storage tank at one of its gas stations discharged several thousand gallons of gasoline. The parties agreed that the tank was listed on the...
Continue Reading
Posted on Oct 21, 2015
In a case involving a group of Pennsylvania plaintiffs that alleges injuries from “noxious odors and air particulates” allegedly emanating from a coke plant, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania examined the plaintiffs’ claims in deciding a motion to dismiss last week. The court dismissed the plaintiffs’ public nuisance claim because the plaintiffs failed to identify a specific harm that the public would suffer beyond the alleged harm that the particular plaintiffs would suffer. The court allowed the private nuisance claim to proceed...
Continue Reading
Posted on Oct 14, 2015
The Secretary of Labor (through OSHA) determined that an industrial manufacturer of air circulating equipment violated 29 C.F.R. 1910.212(a)(1), which requires barrier guards on certain industrial equipment, and fined the company $490,000. An ALJ rejected the Secretary’s interpretation of the standard and vacated the fine, the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission adopted the ALJ’s decision, and the Secretary challenged the order in the Eighth Circuit. The panel decision of that court held in favor of the Secretary, but the court granted the company’s petition...
Continue Reading
Posted on Oct 10, 2015
The Federal Railroad Administration announced yesterday new upcoming rail-track standards in connection with reporting its detailed findings of the crude train derailment earlier this year in West Virginia. The agency announced it will release a Safety Advisory, which urges closer and more detailed inspections where defects and flaws are suspected, and stronger training for rail inspection vehicle operators. It also announced that the agency will explore the need for rail-head wear standards and potentially require railroads to slow trains or replace a rail when certain conditions pose a...
Continue Reading
Posted on Oct 9, 2015
Earlier today, the Sixth Circuit stayed the implementation of the EPA’s “Clean Water rule,” which purported “through increased use of bright-line boundaries” to make “the process of identifying waters protected by the Clean Water Act easier to understand, more predictable and consistent with the law and peer reviewed science, while protecting the streams and wetlands that form the foundation of our nation’s water resources.” The court is currently reviewing its subject-matter jurisdiction over the dispute, the court decided to stay...
Continue Reading
Posted on Oct 9, 2015
In the litigation following the interruption of the Charleston, West Virginia water supply caused by a leaking chemical storage tank in January 2014, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia ruled yesterday that the plaintiffs could certify a class for determining liability, but refused to certify a class for purposes of establishing damages. The plaintiffs had asked the court to establish a class of affected businesses and water company customers to adjudicate the issue of damages suffered by the class resulting from the loss of tap water caused by the chemical...
Continue Reading