Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway Co., et al. v. U.S., et al.

Case Updates

The Supreme Court held that companies that sell chemicals in the ordinary course of business are not liable under CERCLA (Superfund Act) for the disposal costs of the substances on the theory that the sellers somehow “arranged” for the products' disposal. The Court also held that, where a defendant shows that it is reasonable to do so, courts may apportion liability for cleanup costs rather than assign joint and several liability to the parties.

NCLC urged the Supreme Court to decide that companies that sell chemicals in the ordinary course of business should not be held liable under CERCLA or the Superfund Act for the disposal costs of the substances on the theory that the sellers somehow “arranged” for the products’ disposal. NCLC also argued that the Ninth Circuit improperly imposed heightened evidentiary standards on defendants who seek to apportion liability under the act.

This case is consolidated with Shell Oil Company v. U.S., et al.