Environmental Litigation

Making Complex Science Concepts Simple

In addition to seasoned trial attorneys, many with science or engineering backgrounds, our team includes experienced environmental counselors with insight into rulemaking, permitting, remediation, regulatory compliance and dispute resolution. This combination provides the technical fluency to break down complex scientific matters for judges and juries, and the legal acumen to turn case facts into favorable outcomes and advise clients on environmental matters before litigation or compliance-related issues arise. Our broad perspective, varied experience and deep insight enable us to identify emerging issues and trends, such as climate change-induced damages, to help our clients minimize risk.

Our Work in Action – Representative Examples

• Defended a metallurgical manufacturing company in a Clean Water Act and Superfund natural resource damage lawsuit brought jointly by the United States, Ohio and West Virginia alleging that a wastewater treatment chemical used by our client had killed fish and freshwater mussels in the Ohio River. We assembled a team of scientific experts that collectively rebutted the governments’ causation theory, leading the governmental plaintiffs to settle the case just before trial for a small fraction of their claim.
• Obtained dismissal with prejudice of toxic tort claims against our client in a multi-plaintiff “cancer cluster” case based on evidence from an environmental investigation that demonstrated there was no causal connection between our client’s former rubber manufacturing facility and the plaintiffs.
• Obtained complete dismissal of a foreign company from a billion-dollar California Superfund case via a detailed factual demonstration proving that our client could not be deemed the corporate “alter ego” of the U.S. company that previously owned the site at issue, thus establishing that our client was not subject to the personal jurisdiction of a California court.
• Successfully defended the former owner of a secondary lead smelter against an $800 million Superfund claim seeking the cleanup of over 8,000 off-site residential properties allegedly contaminated by the aerial deposition of lead emitted from the smelter. The court agreed with our arguments that (1) a cutting-edge geostatistical analysis of the site data demonstrated that no detectable lead emissions reached the residential properties and (2) air emissions from the former facility were not legally actionable.
• Successfully defended an Ohio manufacturing company against an enforcement action brought by the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency regarding a groundwater contamination plume emanating from the client’s property, even though our client was addressing the matter under Ohio’s Voluntary Action Program. On appeal to Ohio’s Environmental Review Appeals Commission, we obtained summary judgment that the voluntary cleanup program’s “safe harbor” provision barred the Ohio EPA’s claims.
• Successfully defended a petroleum company against claims by the Ohio EPA seeking remediation of an 80-year-old former petroleum refinery site. The settlement was based on our negotiation of a novel “risk-based” remedial approach, which saved our client millions of dollars in cleanup costs compared to the cost if a traditional approach had been taken.
• Negotiated the settlement of a U.S. EPA Superfund claim for costs incurred to replace residential drinking water wells with municipal water lines in an area in New Hampshire contaminated with 1,4-dioxane.