Cromwell v. New York

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that a CERCLA plaintiff asserting an “arranger” claim must show, inter alia, “that the defendant generated hazardous waste at the clean-up site”
• holding that the polluter bears the burden of showing divisibility, and “[t]he government has no burden of proof with respect to what caused the release of hazardous waste and triggered response costs.”
• stating that approach \may be contrary to the statutory dictates of CERCLA\ and instead leaving the choice of when to address divisibility \to the sound discretion of the trial court\
• stating CERCLA plaintiff entitled to summary judgment on issue of liability, even when genuine issues of fact remain as to appropriate damages
• stating CERCLA plaintiff entitled to summary judgment on issue of liability, even when genuine issues of fact remain as to appropriate damages
• finding “differing contentions supported by expert affidavits raise sufficient questions of fact to preclude the granting of summary judgment on the divisibility issue.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).