September 10, 2010

Over a year the U.S. Supreme Court issued an important decision, Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway Company v. United States, 129 S. Ct. 1870 (2009), in which it addressed liability under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 (“CERCLA”) for persons who arrange for the disposal of hazardous substances.  The U.S. Supreme Court’sBurlington Northern decision also addressed how liability for investigations and site cleanups should be apportioned among responsible parties who are jointly and severally liable for those costs.

Since the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision, lower federal courts have heard and decided cases involving arranger liability and apportionment of costs in CERCLA matters. These Courts have applied the Burlington Northern ruling to matters where CERCLA liability issues have been raised. Joseph Maternowski of the Hessian & McKasy Environmental Law Attorney Practice Group collaborated together and prepared an article entitled “CERCLA After Burlington Northern”  that appears in the Summer 2010 edition of the Minnesota State Bar Association’s Environmental, Natural Resources and Energy Law Section Newsletter.  A link to the article is found at:

The environmental attorneys at Hessian & McKasy’s Environmental Law Attorney Practice Group have experience litigating environmental cases including cost recovery cases in state and federal courts and before administrative agencies. Our team of attorneys and paralegals prides itself on zealous advocacy on behalf of our clients. For information on the attorneys in Hessian & McKasy’s Environmental Law Attorney Practice Group, please visit:

The views contained within this entry and on this website are my own and do not constitute those of Hessian & McKasy, P.A.

To receive blog updates and posts, please provide your e-mail address in the space at the top of this page.