Supreme Court Sends Strong Signal That Lower Courts Should Stop Interpreting CERCLA 'In A Liberal Manner' And Focus On The Statute’s 'Text And Structure'

The Supreme Court's decision in CTS Corp. v. Waldburger, No. 13-339, 573 U.S. __ (June 9, 2014), sends a strong message to lower courts that the oft-repeated refrain that CERCLA is a "remedial statute" that must be "interpreted in a liberal manner" to effectuate its purpose cannot "substitute for a conclusion grounded in the statute's text and structure." The refrain that CERCLA must be "interpreted in a liberal manner" has been used time and again by CERCLA plaintiffs - including the federal government - to encourage courts to make an already severe statute all the more so. This is exactly what the Fourth Circuit did in this case, resulting in a 7-2 reversal by the Supreme Court. This decision will make it more difficult for future CERCLA plaintiffs to persuade courts to interpret CERCLA's provision "in a liberal manner" to suit their claims.

In the decision below, the Fourth Circuit held that CERCLA Section 309, 42 U.S.C. § 9658, preempts state statutes of repose in addition to state statutes of limitations even though CERCLA does not mention statutes of repose. (A statute of repose cuts off a claim at a certain period of time after the defendant's last culpable act and reflects a legislative judgment that the defendant should be free from liability thereafter. This period is not subject to equitable tolling. By contrast, a statute of limitation cuts off a claim at a certain period of time after an injury occurs or is discovered and reflects a legislative determination that a plaintiff should be encouraged to promptly pursue a claim. This period is subject to equitable tolling.) In reversing that decision, the Supreme Court noted the Fourth Circuit's interpretation had been guided by "the proposition that remedial statutes should be interpreted in a liberal manner." The Court declared that it was "error" to treat this ostensible interpretive guide "as a substitute for a conclusion grounded in the statute's text and structure." With a terse reminder that "Congressional intent is discerned...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT