Larry Schnapf

Statute of Limitations Bars Purchaser’s Claim For 1981 Pipeline Spill

In Carolyn Vickers Inc. v. Unocal Corp., 2011 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 9642 (Ct. App-2nd Dist. 12/19/11), Alan Little Ventures (ALV) purchased a 4.1 acre tract of land in San Luis Obispo in 2005. The land had been subdivided into 17 lots by the sellers, Phyllis and Alex Madonna (the “Madonnas”), and was zoned for […]

Statute of Limitations Bars Purchaser’s Claim For 1981 Pipeline Spill Read More »

California Appeals Court Rules Reopening of NFA Letter Does Not Trigger Contractual Indemnification

Anyone who has negotiated the purchase of a gas station is aware that these agreements are incredibly complex. The contracts have dense definitions, dependent and inter-related provisions, and grant broad discretion to the sellers in determining the scope and conduct of the cleanup. A buyer who does not retain an environmental attorney who has previously

California Appeals Court Rules Reopening of NFA Letter Does Not Trigger Contractual Indemnification Read More »

NJ Appeals Court Rules ISRA Does Not Provide Basis for Voiding Sale of Tax Lien

The New Jersey Industrial Site Recovery Act (“ISRA”, f/k/a Environmental Cleanup Resonsibility Act or “ECRA”) requires industrial establishments to undergo environmental investigation and cleanup when they are to be closed or transferred. I have always felt that if we had a national ISRA law, the country would have a lot fewer brownfield sites. One of

NJ Appeals Court Rules ISRA Does Not Provide Basis for Voiding Sale of Tax Lien Read More »

Bank Declines To Foreclose Because of Costs to Remedy Stormwater Violations

When builders were defaulting on construction loans during the height of the Great Recession, states began turning to banks to ensure that partially completed developments remained in compliance with environmental laws. The greatest number of enforcement actions were brought against banks in California,Georgia and North Carolina with unconfirmed reports in other states. Under the federal Clean

Bank Declines To Foreclose Because of Costs to Remedy Stormwater Violations Read More »

Acquisitions Bring CERCLA Liability to Banking Conglomerate

From a purely legal standpoint, the recent ruling In Tennessee v. Roane Holdings Ltd., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 143703 (E.D.TN 12/14/11) was not unusual. The court ruled on a motion to dismiss that a party who had entered into an administrative order on consent could not bring a cost recovery action under CERCLA section 107

Acquisitions Bring CERCLA Liability to Banking Conglomerate Read More »

Texas Supreme Court Rules Injection Well Permit Not Shield To Tort Actions

In FPL Farming Ltd v Environmental Processing Systems, L.C., 54 Tex. Sup. J. 1744 (2011), the petitioner FPL Farming (FPL) owned two tracts of land that it used for rice farming. In 1996, Environmental Processing Systems (EPS) applied for a permit to operate two Class III injection wells on land adjoining one of FPL’s tracts.

Texas Supreme Court Rules Injection Well Permit Not Shield To Tort Actions Read More »

5th Circuit Says OPA Third Party Defense Does Not Apply to Indirect Fueling Arrangements

The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit recently had the opportunity to explore the scope of the Oil Pollution Act (OPA) third party defense  in Buffalo Marine Services, Inc. v. United States, 663 F.3d 750 (5th Cir. 2011). While the OPA third party defense set forth at set forth at 33 U.S.C.S.

5th Circuit Says OPA Third Party Defense Does Not Apply to Indirect Fueling Arrangements Read More »

Migratory Bird Treaty Act Held Not To Apply To Reserve Pits Used in Oil and Gas Operations

As North Dakota has become a leader in hydraulic fracturing, the state has also begun to generate some interesting caselaw. Though not specifically a fracking case, a recent decision discusses the liability of drillers under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) for birds who die because of exposure to reserve pits. This MTBA makes it

Migratory Bird Treaty Act Held Not To Apply To Reserve Pits Used in Oil and Gas Operations Read More »

11th Circuit Rules Parties To Consent Decree Limited to Contribution Claim

The Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit joined the 2nd,3rd and 8th Circuits in holding that a PRP that incurs response costs pursuant to a consent decree may only recover its costs through a section 113(f) contribution action and may not bring a 107 cost recovery action. In Solutia v McWane, 2012 U.S.App. LEXIS

11th Circuit Rules Parties To Consent Decree Limited to Contribution Claim Read More »

Scroll to Top