United States v. Hooker Chemicals and Plastics Corp.
United States District Court for the Western District of New York
722 F. Supp. 960 (1989)
- Written by Liz Nakamura, JD
Facts
Occidental Chemical Corporation (OCC) (defendant), also known as Hooker Chemicals and Plastics Corporation or Hooker Electrochemical Company, dumped nearly 22,000 tons of chemical waste into the Love Canal landfill, located in upstate New York. Some of the chemicals dumped were classified as hazardous under the federal Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA). Subsequently, OCC sold the landfill site to the Niagara Falls Board of Education (NFBOE). Several years later, hazardous chemicals were discovered in the surrounding groundwater, surface water, soil, and residential buildings. New York State and the federal government (collectively, the government) (plaintiffs) declared a public health emergency. The government sued OCC, arguing that (1) OCC should be held jointly and severally liable under CERCLA for the costs incurred to clean up the landfill site, relocate families living in the surrounding area, and otherwise abate the environmental contamination, and (2) OCC should be held liable for creating a public nuisance under New York common law by dumping hazardous chemicals in a way that endangered the public. The district court granted the government partial summary judgment on the issue of costs under CERCLA. The court then separately ruled on the government’s motion for summary judgment regarding the public-nuisance issue.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Curtin, 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.