Raytheon Aircraft Co. v. US, No. 08-3237
In a cost recovery action under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, judgment for plaintiff U.S. is affirmed where: 1) defendant was unable to establish that the Army used the chemical at issue at the contested site; 2) the court reasonably chose not to credit the testimony of veterans who claimed the chemical was used by the Army; and 3) defendant failed to rebut the presumption that the EPA's efforts to list the site on the National Priorities List were consistent with a national contingency plan.
Read Raytheon Aircraft Co. v. US, No. 08-3237
Filed December 29, 2009
Opinion by Judge Murphy
Robert M. Jackson, Honigman Miller Schwartz and Cohn LLP, Detroit, MI
Stephen J. Torline and Derek T. Teeter, Husch Blackwell Sanders LLP, Kansas City, MO
Brian C. Toth, Scott Pemberton, Catherine R. Sanders, Environment & Natural Resources Division, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC
You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help
Meeting with a lawyer can help you understand your options and how to best protect your rights. Visit our attorney directory to find a lawyer near you who can help.