Foley Hoag LLP

We represented one defendant in a multi-party federal superfund action, which we were able to settle through mediation

Using a third-party mediator, we were able to resolve a superfund contribution claim between the plaintiff and thirteen defendants

Asserted claims against numerous insurers arising from environmental contamination of over seventeen separate sites located in more than seven states. Through these claims, we have obtained summary judgment requiring various insurers to pay our client’s defense costs. We have also obtained settlements, which reimbursed our client substantial portions of the sums it has incurred in addressing its potential environmental liabilities.

For our client Hoechst Celanese Corporation, brought a lawsuit against numerous insurers for defense and indemnification of claims arising from environmental contamination at various facilities around the country. We defeated and successfully opposed on appeal a defense motion based upon supposed late notice, which led to a favorable settlement.

Represented Raytheon Company in an action seeking recovery of millions of dollars in costs related to the cleanup of approximately 60 sites in several states. The case settled on the eve of trial.

Advised a manufacturer of electronic components regarding the defense of claims for personal injury brought by neighbors of a former manufacturing facility. The residents allege a variety of ailments, including some cancers they claim were caused by exposure to numerous chemicals, including polychlorinated biphenyls, metals, and volatile organic compounds such as trichloroethylene.

Represented the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority in a lawsuit filed pursuant to the Clean Air Act. The lawsuit is alleging violations of the Massachusetts State Implementation Plan (“SIP”) concerning public transportation improvements.

Represented the country of Djibouti in assessing potential claims against three large global oil companies concerning contamination of the principal port of Djibouti, which resulted from operations by those oil companies near the port. Advice has included an assessment of potential claims against the oil companies under international law, in what forum the claims should be brought, and the relationship between potential international claims and claims already pending in courts in Djibouti.

In one complex, multi-party case, we advised our client regarding matters we believed needed to be litigated before ADR could be effective. We then represented our client in the mediation process, achieving a settlement requiring the defendants to take over the cleanup at all of the sites at issue in the case.

Represented a major industrial pretreatment discharger in defense of a citizens’ lawsuit brought under the Clean Water Act, which was seeking both injunctive relief and civil penalties

Represented two parties in defense of a private cost-recovery action involving a National Priorities List Superfund site. On behalf of one defendant, we obtained a precedent-setting judicial decision requiring private plaintiffs to prove that a defendant’s waste caused plaintiffs to incur response costs. We also acted as common trial counsel on behalf of all defendants with respect to the plaintiffs’ disposal activities.

Represented the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority in its successful trial against the United States involving Safe Drinking Water Act claims that the water supply for eastern Massachusetts should be filtered

Acted as special litigation counsel for the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority for many years in connection with the cleanup of the Boston Harbor and ongoing compliance matters under the Clean Water Act

Represented Hasbro, Inc. in successful litigation over millions of dollars in cleanup costs at a site in Lancaster, Pennsylvania

Represented the former operator of an industrial facility in defense of claims by more than thirty neighbors claiming personal injury and property damage from alleged exposure to hazardous chemicals. After having the personal injury claims dismissed, we were able to settle the property damage claims through mediation.

Won summary judgment against a primary insurer on a duty to defend DEP Chapter 21E proceeding regarding a former coal-tar processing facility. We tried a “lost policies” case against a second insurer, successfully establishing the terms of the policies and won summary judgment on the second insurer’s duty to defend. We also secured a 10-year stay of the primary insurer’s counterclaims seeking declaration of no indemnity obligation. The case is presently pending against primary and excess insurers.

Retained to appeal a summary judgment granted to an insurer on grounds that “owned property” exclusion precluded coverage under a homeowner’s policy liability provisions for the costs of cleanup of a home-heating oil spill. The Supreme Judicial Court reversed, agreeing that costs incurred to abate contamination of third-party property are covered, even if remedial work is performed on the policyholder’s property. The case is now widely cited to defeat “owned property” defense under commercial liability insurance.

For our client Fairchild Industries, in litigation in the California and New York federal courts, obtained a favorable settlement in the litigation of several polluted sites around the country—notwithstanding the carrier's asserted defense of late notice of the claims

Acted as counsel for an electric power generating company before the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Environmental Appeals Board in an administrative appeal of the thermal discharge and cooling water intake components of a NPDES permit issued for one of its facilities

Represented the City of Portland, Oregon in a challenge to the Environmental Protection Agency’s Long-Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule, which is pending in the United States Appeals Court for the District of Columbia. Portland is challenging the new rules requiring that it provide treatment for cryptosporidium and requiring that its open distribution reservoirs be covered. The challenge is based upon both the arbitrary and capricious nature of the rules and the fact that the cryptosporidium rule was not based upon the best available peer-reviewed science.