Federal Case

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that in Section 113 claims, it is not necessary that all parties be joined as defendants
• holding that contribution traditionally requires common liability for. the same injury and the same holds true for Section 113(f)
• holding claim based on Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (\CERLCA\), which was enacted after the discharge date, was not barred
• “it is inherent in the concept of contribution that the persons commonly liable be liable to the same entity. Otherwise, contribution could become an endless circle of attempts to seek reimbursement from unrelated parties.”
• “In permitting a party to seek contribution from ‘any other person who is liable or potentially liable’ under § 107(a), it is inherent in the concept of contribution that the persons commonly liable be liable to the same entity.” (quoting 42 U.S.C. § 9613(f))
• reporting approvingly prior district court proceedings

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).