United States v. Union Corp.
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
277 F. Supp. 2d 478 (2009)
- Written by Abby Keenan, JD
Facts
The United States brought a lawsuit under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) in federal district court against potentially responsible parties (PRPs) (plaintiffs), including Union Corp., to recover cleanup costs for a site contaminated with polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). The PCBs were released during the recycling of electrical transformers at the site. The PRPs filed a contribution claim as third-party plaintiffs against Monsanto (defendant), the manufacturer of the PCBs, even though the PRPs did not receive the PCB-laden materials directly from Monsanto. The PRPs raised several state-law claims, including strict products liability, strict liability for abnormally dangerous activity, and trespass. Monsanto filed a motion for summary judgment, arguing that (1) Monsanto was not liable under a theory of strict products liability, because its PCB-containing products were not unfit for their intended purposes; (2) Monsanto was not liable under a theory of strict liability for abnormally dangerous activity, because it did not engage in any abnormally dangerous activity; and (3) Monsanto was not liable under a trespass theory, because it did not intentionally cause its product to be deposited at the site. The federal district court applied Pennsylvania law in addressing the state-law claims.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Giles, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 966,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,500 briefs, keyed to 1,007 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.
- AI-generated podcast version of every brief — listen on the go, between classes, or whenever reading isn’t an option. New
Understand your casebook readings in seconds
Use our case briefs to comprehend your casebook readings faster, supplement your notes and outlines, and outshine your peers in class.
Get instant access to over 47,500+ expert-written case briefs in a searchable database keyed to 1,007 law school casebooks.


