Harlan D. Douglass, et ux v. Shamrock Paving, Inc.
Court of Appeals of Washington
1Opinion of the CourtPennell, J.
¶ 1 The Model Toxics Control Act (MTCA), chapters 70.105D and 82.21 RCW, provides a statutory framework for recovery of hazardous waste remediation costs. Shamrock Paving Inc. admittedly discharged petroleum, a statutorily defined hazardous substance, onto the Douglasses’ property. Nevertheless, Shamrock denies responsibility for costs because the quantities released were too small to pose a potential threat to human health or the environment.
¶2 Shamrock’s position is factually accurate and legally significant, but it is not dispositive. Our disagreement with Shamrock lies in the scope of…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Davis v. Department of Labor & IndustriesWashington Supreme Court · 1980
- Chuong Van Pham v. City of SeattleWashington Supreme Court · 2007
- Chuong Van Pham v. Seattle City LightWashington Supreme Court · 2007
- Williams v. TilayeWashington Supreme Court · 2012
- Taliesen Corp. v. Razore Land Co.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2006
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Douglass v. Shamrock Paving, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 2017