United States Third Circuit

Where factual issues remain with respect to defendant's role in the release of pollutants at a mercury processing facility, defendant may be responsible under the "arranged for" provision of CERCLA Section 107(a)(3), for some of the cleanup costs, because it arranged for the processing of mercury at the facility for many years.

Appellate Information

• Argued 07/07/2003
• Decided 09/16/2003
• Published 09/16/2003

Judges

• Before FUENTES, SMITH, and GREENBERG, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Third Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Samuel P. Moulthrop,Riker, Danzig, Scherer, Hyland & Peretti, Morristown, NJ, Joseph S. Justice, Thomas T. Terp, Taft, Stettinius & Hollister, Cincinnati, OH, John G. Harkins, Jr. [Argued], Steven A. Reed, Harkins Cunningham, Philadelphia, PA, Laurence S. Kirsch, Jonathan R. Stone, Frederick R. Anderson, Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft, Washington, DC, Gerald P. Norton, Norton, Harkins Cunningham, Washington, DC, for Appellant.


• For Appellees:
  
• David J. D'Aloia [Argued], Robert B. Nussbaum, Michelle V. Fleishman, Saiber, Schlesinger, Satz & Goldstein, Newark, NJ, for Appellee Tenneco, Inc.