Many Superfund practitioners have spent years litigating cases in which a private plaintiff seeks to establish that defendants are liable for costs of responding to a Superfund problem and that they ought to bear some specific equitable share of the total responsibility. Often, the plaintiff has brought the case even though the plaintiff has not paid a very significant portion of the total costs, has not committed to pay a significant portion of the costs, and has not been adjudicated responsible for anything. Why does that private plaintiff get to trigger allocation litigation?

I teach a law school course on the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA or Superfund), 42 U.S.C. Section 9601-75. Even after more than four decades, I still bear the scars of the hide-the-ball way in which I was taught in law school. For that reason, in addition to assigned readings I prepare notes for each class that I distribute to the students. I have just finished completing the 2024 update for this semester, 205 pages of text collecting most of the appellate authorities under CERCLA that are all listed on a table of cases that has grown to 34 pages itself.