Federal and state underground storage tank (UST) programs impose closure obligations on the owners or operators of USTs that are taken out of service. If the tanks are to be inactive for a short period of time (the time period varies depending on the state), the tanks must comply with temporary closure requirements. Owners or […]
NY Ct Says Former Tenant Liable For Abandoned Tanks As Trade Fixtures Read More »
The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R) in the master declaration for the Tesoro del Valle homeowners association (Tesoro) recorded in 2003 provided that homeowners must obtain approval from the Architectural Control Committee (ACC) before making any improvements. Tesoro later approved Design Guidelines that included architectural standards for solar energy systems. In 2005, defendant purchase their
California Court Upholds Solar Energy Restrictions of Homeowners Association Read More »
In a case that may have implications for fracking operations, a federal district court for the western district of Virginia allowed property damage claims to proceed against a coalbed methane operator. In C.J. Ritter Lumber Co., Inc. v Consolidated Coal Co., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 95131 (W.D. Va. 8/25/11), the plaintiff entered into coal leases
Claims Against Coalbed Methane Operator Allowed to Proceed Read More »
It seems like there were a lot of cases in 2011 involving commercial properties impacted by methane gas from former landfills. A recent case involved a novel question if the owner of a hotel damaged by methane gas migrating from a landfill could seek administrative claim status in a chapter 7 bankruptcy case. In the
No Administrative Claim For Hotel Damaged By Methane from Bankrupt Landfill Operator Read More »
We have discussed in prior posts that New York courts have broadly construed the definition of a “discharger” under the New York Navigation Law. Even owners of property with inactive underground storage tanks (USTs) have been held liable as “dischargers” despite the fact they may have not known about the tank much less exercised any
Tenant Not Liable For Inactive UST Shared With Adjacent Property Read More »
EPA recently published notice of two proposed prospective purchaser agreements (PPAs) . PPAs had been a critical tool for brownfield development prior to the 2002 CERCLA amendments that added the bona fide prospective purchaser (BFPP) defense. Following the 2002 amendments, EPA issued guidance that indicated that the agency would only issue PPAs in special circumstances since the BFPP was
Recent EPA PPAs Require Financial Assurances Read More »
The title of this post sounds like a teaser to a bad joke but unfortunately it refers to the latest round of motions in two sprawling lawsuits involving a defunct planned community that was to be developed on what proved to be a part of a world war 2 bombing practice range. The defendants include
A Lawyer, an Underwriter and an Appraisor-An Update Read More »
The New York State Court of Appeals (New York’s highest court) rejected a challenge that the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) exceeded its authority when it promulgated regulations requiring state superfund sites to be remediated to “pre-disposal” conditions when feasible. In the Matter of New York State Superfund Coalition v New York
NY High Court Upholds State Superfund Regs Read More »
When retaining environmental consultants, one of the key issues to review in the consultant’s standard terms and conditions is the limitation of liability (LOL) clause. This clause frequently seeks to cap the consultant’s liability at the amount of its fees. Because consultants are usually expected to carry at least $1MM in liability coverage, clients often want consultants to be liable
Ct Upholds Limitation of Liability in Consultant Negligence Case Read More »
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York dismissed a cost recovery action filed by the State of New York because the state waited too long to file its complaint. The outcome hinged on whether construction of wellhead treatment constituted a remedial action or removal action. This case is significant because New York
Federal Ct Says NY Waited Too Long to File Cost Recovery Read More »