Refined Metals Corp. v. N.L. Industries, Inc.

Dist Ct. did not err in dismissing on timeliness grounds plaintiff’s action under Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) for environmental costs that E.P.A. required plaintiff to incur on property that defendant sold to plaintiff, where E.P.A. action resulted in 1998 Decree requiring plaintiff to pay such costs, and where plaintiff did not initiate instant action until 2017. Dist. Ct. could properly consider plaintiff’s claim as “contribution” action under section 113(f)(3)(B) of CERCLA, and such claims are subject to 3-year limitations period, which started on date of 1998 Decree. Ct. rejected defendant’s contention that: (1) 1998 Decree did not trigger limitations period for contribution claim because plaintiff refused to admit liability in 1998 Decree; (2) only settlements that resolve liability for CERCLA-specific violations qualify as predicates for contribution claims; and (3) it could not seek contribution from defendant because it and defendant are not “joint tortfeasors.”