ELR Citation: ELR 21220
No(s). 86-1673 (M.D. Pa. Apr 29, 1988)

The court holds that plaintiffs' tort claims arising out of contamination of their water supplies are not barred by Pennsylvania's two-year statute of limitations, and their pre-1986 causes of action for response costs under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and liability Act (CERCLA) are not barred by laches. The court first holds that there is insufficient evidence to determine if plaintiffs' trespass and nuisance claims are barred; more information is needed to determine whether there was one continuing harm or a series of discrete harms. The court next holds that plaintiffs' negligence and strict liability claims are not barred, because, it is unclear when plaintiffs knew or reasonably should have known about the contamination and that it was caused by the conduct of others. Finally, the court holds that plaintiffs' claims for CERCLA response costs are not barred by laches. CERCLA's statute of limitations is not applicable because it was enacted in 1986, after the contamination of plaintiffs' wells occurred. Since a CERCLA cost recovery action is equitable in nature, it is inappropriate to use an analogous state or federal statute. Plaintiffs' lawsuit was commenced no more than approximately three years after plaintiffs learned of the contamination, which is insufficient to invoke laches.

[Related decisions in this litigation are published at 18 ELR 21215 and 21218.]

Counsel are listed at 18 ELR 21218.