Representative Matters
- Representing Union Pacific Railroad Company as owner of contaminated property in a toxic tort action brought by 30 plaintiffs whose drinking water wells and properties were impacted by chlorinated solvents. Following a months-long jury trial, the jury found that plaintiffs’ wells and property were contaminated by other sources (two neighborhood dry cleaners) and returned a defense verdict.
- Defending railroads in Polanco Act litigation, including trial and appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, concerning petroleum and metals contamination in Stockton. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Stockton v. BNSF Railway Co., 643 F.3d 668 (9th Cir. 2011).
- The United States Supreme Court affirmed a federal district court's determination, obtained by Barg Coffin Lewis & Trapp, LLP attorneys following a bench trial, holding that the environmental harm at a Superfund site was reasonably capable of apportionment and rejecting imposition of joint and several liability under CERCLA. Burlington Northern v. United States, 129 S. Ct. 1870 (2009).
- Representing Cargill, Inc. in San Francisco Baykeeper v. Cargill, Inc., in which the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that a Cargill pond near San Francisco Bay was not “waters of the United States” within the jurisdiction of the Clean Water Act. The Ninth Circuit opinion is 481 F. 3d 700 (9th Cir. 2007).
- Prevailing on behalf of two law firms in binding arbitration of a fee dispute with Townsend, Townsend & Crew in the Microsoft Antitrust Litigation.
- Representing a real estate development company and its principals in defeating a $52 million claim involving 1,100 acres in Los Gatos, California, and recovering over $16 million on a counterclaim relating to the same property after a one-month jury trial.
- Defending a major oil company in approximately 50 lawsuits, including several alleged class actions, brought by more than 14,000 plaintiffs concerning an airborne release of a chemical catalyst from a San Francisco Bay Area refinery.
- Representing the same major oil company in a London arbitration, as well as California litigation, seeking insurance coverage from European and Bermuda-based insurers for the amount of the settlement with the more than 14,000 individuals who claimed property damage and bodily injuries from the industrial accident that caused the chemical release, recovering more than $55 million in insurance proceeds.
