Facts

Developer 3000 E. Imperial LLC sued Robertshaw Controls Company and Whittaker Corporation for environmental damage to property in Lynwood, California that was formerly owned by the defendants and used by them for manufacturing activities. The suit sought cost recovery under federal CERCLA and RCRA, and also the California Land Reuse and Revitalization Act, trespass, and nuisance. The district court ultimately tried only the federal claims and dismissed the state law claims without prejudice.

In November 2006, plaintiff 3000 E. Imperial LLC purchased a property located at 3000 East Imperial Highway in Lynwood from Lynwood Imperial LLC. The property is situated across the street from the Plaza Mexico shopping center, which is owned by an affiliate of 3000 E. Imperial LLC. In the early 1930s the property was acquired by a predecessor-in-interest to Robertshaw Controls Co. In August 1955 the property was acquired by a predecessor-in-interest to Whittaker Corp. and Whittaker Controls. Both Robertshaw and Whittaker manufactured aerospace valves at the property.

The property was found to be contaminated by trichloroethylene, benzene, and other hazardous substances, which leaked from underground tanks and had been spilled. These hazardous substances were found in high concentrations in the soil and groundwater beneath and adjacent to the property.

Plaintiff sued Robertshaw Controls Co., Whittaker Corp. and Whittaker Controls, Inc. Whittaker cross-claimed against other previous owners of the property, but following summary judgment motions, those cross-defendants were dismissed.

Plaintiff settled its case against Robertshaw. Robertshaw agreed to remediate the property under the supervision of the California Department of Toxic Substances Control. The trial continued against only Whittaker Corp. for recovery of response costs and injunctive relief under the federal Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. The district court dismissed the state claims without prejudice. Whittaker counterclaimed against plaintiff for cost recovery and contribution.

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Plaintiff submitted evidence of plaintiff's manufacturing operations, the contamination at the site, and the pathways for contamination.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS:
Whittaker denied using the underground storage tanks and using TCE.

Damages

Plaintiff 3000 E. Imperial LLC sought recovery of response costs.

Result

The district court found that Whittaker used TCE in its operations, that the underground storage tanks leaked hazardous substances during Whittaker's ownership, that plaintiff was a bona fide purchaser, and that plaintiff was entitled to all claimed response costs under CERCLA. The district court denied the RCRA claim as moot. The district court dismissed Whittaker's counterclaim based on plaintiff's status as a bona fide purchaser under CERCLA (the first ruling upholding the application of the bona fide purchaser defense in the country). The district court found in favor of plaintiff; it found Whittaker jointly and severally liable for response costs. The court awarded plaintiff response costs of $1,234,457.61. After its initial judgment, the court granted plaintiff's motion for extraordinary costs, denied Whittaker's objections to plaintiff's claimed costs, and granted plaintiff's motion for pre-judgment interest. The total of the amended judgment in favor of plaintiff 3000 E. Imperial LLC against Whittaker Corporation was $1,375,276.70.