Quimbee logo
DMCA.com Protection Status

Atlantic Richfield Co. v. Christian

140 S. Ct. 1335 (2020)

Case BriefRelatedOptions
From our private database of 33,800+ case briefs...

Atlantic Richfield Co. v. Christian

United States Supreme Court

140 S. Ct. 1335 (2020)

Facts

Congress enacted the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), also known as the Superfund statute, to address the environmental and health consequences of large-scale industrial pollution. CERCLA was enacted (1) to promote the efficient cleanup of hazardous waste sites by developing a comprehensive response to pollution and (2) to ensure that the polluters pay for the cleanup. To accomplish these goals, CERCLA establishes procedures for identifying contaminated sites, known as Superfund sites, and for prioritizing those sites for cleanup. Pursuant to CERCLA, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) may either compel the responsible parties to conduct the cleanup under EPA supervision or conduct the cleanup itself and seek reimbursement from the responsible parties. In the 1970s, Atlantic Richfield Company (defendant) bought the Anaconda Copper Mining Company (Anaconda), which had operated copper smelters in Butte, Montana, contaminating an area of more than 300 square miles with lead and arsenic. After Atlantic Richfield purchased Anaconda, the contaminated area was declared a Superfund site, and cleanup efforts began pursuant to an EPA-approved plan. In 2008, a group of landowners (the landowners) (plaintiffs) within the Superfund site sued Atlantic Richfield in state court, claiming trespass, nuisance, and strict liability and proposing a restoration plan that exceeded the requirements of the EPA’s cleanup plan. Atlantic Richfield moved for summary judgment, arguing that CERCLA precluded the landowners’ claim for restoration damages. The trial court denied the motion, and Atlantic Richfield appealed to the Montana Supreme Court, arguing that CERCLA barred the landowners from seeking relief in state court. Atlantic Richfield also argued that the landowners were potentially responsible parties under CERCLA and thus were prohibited from taking remedial action without EPA approval. The Montana Supreme Court found that the landowners were not potentially responsible parties, and the United States Supreme Court granted certiorari. After determining that it had jurisdiction to hear the matter and that CERCLA did not preclude the landowners from suing Atlantic Richfield in state court, the Court considered whether the landowners were potentially responsible parties.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Roberts, C.J.)

Concurrence/Dissent (Gorsuch, J.)

Concurrence/Dissent (Alito, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 607,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 607,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 33,800 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 607,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 33,800 briefs - keyed to 984 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership