Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Case Briefs
Insurer Lacks Standing to Subrogate Under CERCLA
On March 15, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that an insurer lacked standing to bring a subrogation suit under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (“CERCLA”) because the insurer failed to meet statutory requirements. Chubb Custom Ins. Co. v. Space, 710 F.3d 946 (9th Cir. 2013). The insurer, Chubb, paid $2.4 million under an insurance policy to its insured, Taube-Koret Campus for Jewish Life, for environmental cleanup costs on its property.
The insurer then filed an action against several parties seeking subrogation under ” 107(a) and 112(c) of CERCLA and asserting state law claims for statutory indemnity,
negligence per se and strict liability. The district court dismissed the operative third amended complaint with prejudice, and the Ninth Circuit affirmed on appeal. Amicus curiae briefs were also submitted on behalf of an insurer and United Policyholders.
The majority agreed with the dismissal of Chubb's subrogation claim under '112(c), which provides for statutory subrogation for “any claimant for damages or costs resulting from a release of a hazardous substance ' .” (emphasis added). The term “claimant” is statutorily defined as a person who demands compensation for damages or costs from the Superfund or a potentially responsible party. The court interpreted this definition to require the insured to make a formal demand on the defendants or the Superfund in order for the insurer to properly assert standing for a ' 112 subrogation action. The court felt that requiring the insured to make such a demand was not unduly burdensome as “[i]nsurance companies write their policies in a way to require reasonable cooperation from their insureds.”
The court also agreed that the insurer lacked standing to assert a claim under ' 107(a) which permits private parties to recover certain “costs of response” incurred in connection with the remediation of a polluted site. ' Matthew C. Elstein, Laura G. Ryan and Jeannie P. Lee, Gordon & Rees LLP
'
'
Insurer Lacks Standing to Subrogate Under CERCLA
On March 15, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that an insurer lacked standing to bring a subrogation suit under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (“CERCLA”) because the insurer failed to meet statutory requirements.
The insurer then filed an action against several parties seeking subrogation under ” 107(a) and 112(c) of CERCLA and asserting state law claims for statutory indemnity,
negligence per se and strict liability. The district court dismissed the operative third amended complaint with prejudice, and the Ninth Circuit affirmed on appeal. Amicus curiae briefs were also submitted on behalf of an insurer and United Policyholders.
The majority agreed with the dismissal of Chubb's subrogation claim under '112(c), which provides for statutory subrogation for “any claimant for damages or costs resulting from a release of a hazardous substance ' .” (emphasis added). The term “claimant” is statutorily defined as a person who demands compensation for damages or costs from the Superfund or a potentially responsible party. The court interpreted this definition to require the insured to make a formal demand on the defendants or the Superfund in order for the insurer to properly assert standing for a ' 112 subrogation action. The court felt that requiring the insured to make such a demand was not unduly burdensome as “[i]nsurance companies write their policies in a way to require reasonable cooperation from their insureds.”
The court also agreed that the insurer lacked standing to assert a claim under ' 107(a) which permits private parties to recover certain “costs of response” incurred in connection with the remediation of a polluted site. ' Matthew C. Elstein, Laura G. Ryan and Jeannie P. Lee,
'
'
How Secure Is the AI System Your Law Firm Is Using?
What Law Firms Need to Know Before Trusting AI Systems with Confidential Information In a profession where confidentiality is paramount, failing to address AI security concerns could have disastrous consequences. It is vital that law firms and those in related industries ask the right questions about AI security to protect their clients and their reputation.
COVID-19 and Lease Negotiations: Early Termination Provisions
During the COVID-19 pandemic, some tenants were able to negotiate termination agreements with their landlords. But even though a landlord may agree to terminate a lease to regain control of a defaulting tenant's space without costly and lengthy litigation, typically a defaulting tenant that otherwise has no contractual right to terminate its lease will be in a much weaker bargaining position with respect to the conditions for termination.
Pleading Importation: ITC Decisions Highlight Need for Adequate Evidentiary Support
The International Trade Commission is empowered to block the importation into the United States of products that infringe U.S. intellectual property rights, In the past, the ITC generally instituted investigations without questioning the importation allegations in the complaint, however in several recent cases, the ITC declined to institute an investigation as to certain proposed respondents due to inadequate pleading of importation.
Authentic Communications Today Increase Success for Value-Driven Clients
As the relationship between in-house and outside counsel continues to evolve, lawyers must continue to foster a client-first mindset, offer business-focused solutions, and embrace technology that helps deliver work faster and more efficiently.
The Power of Your Inner Circle: Turning Friends and Social Contacts Into Business Allies
Practical strategies to explore doing business with friends and social contacts in a way that respects relationships and maximizes opportunities.