South Florida Water Management District v. Montalvo
United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
84 F.3d 402 (1996)
- Written by Liz Nakamura, JD
Facts
Juan Montalvo (plaintiff) owned Chemairspray (plaintiff) (the sprayers), which provided pesticide aerial spraying services to local farmers and ranchers (landowners) (defendant). Chemairspray leased a 10-acre parcel with an airstrip, where it loaded the pesticides into the planes and rinsed out the application tanks after pesticide-application runs. Both practices contaminated the airstrip site. Chemairspray leased the airstrip from New Farm, Inc. (defendant). Contamination from the airstrip leaked onto adjacent land owned by South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) (defendant). New Farm and SFWMD sued the sprayers for cleanup costs, and the sprayers admitted liability. The district court found the sprayers liable for 75 percent of the cleanup costs and New Farm liable for the remaining 25 percent as the current owner. The sprayers filed a third-party complaint against the landowners for contribution, arguing the landowners arranged for the disposal of the pesticide wastes at the airstrip site because (1) the landowners contracted Chemairspray to spray pesticides, (2) the landowners owned the pesticides sprayed, (3) the generation of hazardous pesticide waste is part of the pesticide-spraying process, and (4) Chemairspray acted as the landowner’s agent in spraying and disposing of the pesticides. The sprayers did not allege that the landowners knew about the pesticide spills at the airstrip nor that the landowners had any control over the spraying process or the loading and disposal of the pesticides from the Chemairspray planes.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Black, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 briefs, keyed to 994 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.