Abstract

In enacting the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation & Liability Act (CERCLA), Congress intended to impose liability for hazardous substance cleanups on all parties responsible for a site's use and contamination. However, in implementing the CERCLA liability scheme, courts have issued opinions offering unclear and misguided explanations of their decisions. The author suggests that, to properly assure CERCLA's proper operation, the basis for the imposition of liability must be clarified. To this end, the author examines the prescribed liability for individuals, parent corporations and secured creditors and explains the appropriate grounds for the responsibility of each.

Document Type

Article

Publication Date

1992

Notes/Citation Information

Case Western Reserve Law Review, Vol. 42, No. 1 (1992), pp. 65-146

Share

COinS