United States v. Rohm and Haas Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that burden is on defendant to prove inconsistency with NCP
• holding defendants liable pursuant to CERCLA as generators of hazardous substances
• “[T]he liability provisions of section 107(a) are independent of requirements in other provisions in CERCLA.”
• “Owens-Illinois also states as [an] affirmative defense[] what we interpret as USA-EPA’s and NJDEP’s failure to ... provide notice.... Th[is] defenseQ must fail as well. ‘CERCLA imposes no statutory or procedural prerequisites to bringing a section 107(a

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).