Quimbee logo
DMCA.com Protection Status

United States v. Chem-Dyne Corp.

572 F. Supp. 802 (1983)

Case BriefRelatedOptions
From our private database of 35,800+ case briefs...

United States v. Chem-Dyne Corp.

United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio

572 F. Supp. 802 (1983)

Facts

Chem-Dyne Corp. (defendant) operated a facility that disposed of chemical waste from a large number of sources. When the company stopped operating, hazardous waste was left behind, contaminating the site and groundwater. Records showed a number of companies that had sent waste to the facility, but much of the waste was commingled, and the sources were not tracked over time. Additionally, it was unclear which specific types of waste had contaminated the groundwater. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) listed the site on the National Priorities List pursuant to the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). The United States (plaintiff), on behalf of the EPA, sued Chem-Dyne and 23 other parties (the entities) (defendants) that had disposed of waste at the facility. The United States claimed the entities were jointly and severally liable for cleanup under CERCLA. According to legislative history, early drafts of CERCLA included a joint-and-several-liability provision that was removed before the bill was passed. Additionally, according to statements by congressmen from both houses, by removing the provision Congress intended not to statutorily mandate joint and several liabilities, but rather to allow the issue to be “governed by traditional and evolving principles of common law.” The entities filed a motion for partial summary judgment, in which they requested that the court make an early determination on the issue of joint and several liability.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Rubin, C.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 620,000 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 620,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 35,800 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 620,000 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
  • 35,800 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