October Term 2006 · Docket 06-562

Can a liable party sue other liable parties for cleanup costs?

The dispute centers on whether a party responsible for pollution can use a specific statute to recover costs from other responsible parties.

Official caption
United States v. Atlantic Research Corp.
Latest argument session
Latest official Court activity
Latest verified event
Argued
Sources analyzed through
Official Transcript

Verified source milestones

  1. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.

The arguments, in order

This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.

  1. Argument 1 ·

    What happened at the argument

    Mr. Hungar argued that the opposing side seeks to circumvent statutory limitations by manufacturing a parallel mechanism for relief.

    Mr. Armstrong stated that a cost recovery action is an equitable action for restitution without a jury trial.

    Mr. Geck noted that more than 400,000 contaminated sites require the work of private parties for cleanup.

    Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details

    Sources used for this argument breakdown

A citizen's guide to the whole case

What this case is about

This case tests the scope of a federal cleanup statute. It asks if a liable party can sue other liable parties for cost recovery.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on April 23, 2007.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

the side that brought the case wants the Court to bar the opposing side from using the cost recovery statute against other liable parties.

the opposing side wants the Court to allow the use of the cost recovery statute to recover costs from other liable parties.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

the side that brought the case argues that Congress created a specific mechanism for liable parties to share costs, which limits their options.

the opposing side argues that the cost recovery statute allows any private party to seek restitution for cleanup expenses.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Justice Souter asked if the court must determine the innocence of the party bringing the action first.

Justice Ginsburg asked if the Court was wrong to say the statute provides a cause of action for private parties in a prior case.

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

This case defines who can sue for pollution cleanup costs. It determines the financial burden on private parties and the government. It shapes the legal framework for environmental liability nationwide.

Official sources for this section

What happens next

This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.

Official sources for this section

Official Court provenance

Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page

Title and summary sources

Revision history

  1. Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.

  2. Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.

Download this sanitized case as JSON