ELR Citation: ELR 20115
No(s). 08-1042 (10th Cir. May 29, 2009)

The Tenth Circuit held that an individual who already recovered costs incurred responding to environmental damages at a large gold mine facility in Colorado is not entitled to contribution. The individual—the former director and president of the mining company—sought contribution for the amount he agreed to pay to settle the cost recovery action brought against him by the United States and the state of Colorado. Because he had already recovered more than that amount from other sources, including settlements with a construction company and an insurance provider, he has no damages to recover and no right to contribution under CERCLA §113(f). The individual argued that the collateral source rule, which permits an injured plaintiff to recover more than the damages he has suffered as the result of an injury, prohibits crediting the defendants in the amount of the settlement money he already received. But the rule does not apply to §113(f) contribution actions brought by a PRP. A CERCLA contribution action is not a personal injury action by an innocent plaintiff. Instead, it is a claim between two or more culpable tortfeasors, and the policy underlying the collateral source rule—to provide the innocent party with the benefit of any windfall—is simply not advanced in such cases. The individual also argued that the lower court erred in reducing his damages by the full amount of the settlements. But because his injury and the damages he alleges in this lawsuit are the same as those addressed by the settlements, the defendants are entitled to a full credit in the amount of those settlements.

[A prior decision in this litigation can be found at 38 ELR 20034.]