Important Notice: Our web hosting provider recently started charging us for additional visits, which was unexpected. In response, we're seeking donations. Depending on the situation, we may explore different monetization options for our Community and Expert Contributors. It's crucial to provide more returns for their expertise and offer more Expert Validated Answers or AI Validated Answers. Learn more about our hosting issue here.

Did the Aviall decision address contribution rights under section 113(f)(3)(B) of CERCLA?

0
Posted

Did the Aviall decision address contribution rights under section 113(f)(3)(B) of CERCLA?

0

No. While the Court noted that CERCLA ยง 113(f) provides another avenue for contribution under section 113(f)(3)(b), the Court did not address that subsection because it was not at issue in the case. That section provides that a potentially responsible party (PRP) “who has resolved its liability to the United States or a State for some or all of a response action or for some or all of the costs of such action in an administrative or judicially approved settlement” may seek contribution from non-settling PRPs.

Related Questions

What is your question?

*Sadly, we had to bring back ads too. Hopefully more targeted.