United States v. American Cyanamid Co.
United States District Court for the District of Rhode Island
786 F. Supp. 152 (1992)

- Written by Sarah Hoffman, JD
Facts
In 1977, an explosion and tower of flame at the Picillo Pig Farm (the farm) alerted the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to the existence of an extensive amount of hazardous waste on the farm. After the EPA created a cleanup plan and cleaned up the farm, the United States (plaintiff) filed suit against American Cyanamid Co. (ACC) (defendant) on behalf of the EPA for recovery of cleanup costs under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). Summary judgment was granted on behalf of the United States. The only remaining issue was the amount of damages. Special Master Anderson was appointed to make a determination of the facts related to costs. The special master held evidentiary hearings over the course of 10 days. In his report, he recommended a disallowance of almost $300,000 of the government’s claims due to inadequate documentation but recommended all other claims be accepted and compensated. Both parties objected to parts of the special master’s findings. The ACC in particular claimed that the government’s documentation was entirely inadequate, arguing that the costs were inconsistent with the National Contingency Plan (NCP)’s guidance on the procedures for cleaning up hazardous waste because they were not cost effective and therefore not subject to recovery under CERCLA.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Pettine, 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. 46,500 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.