ELR Citation: ELR 20166
No(s). 05-5754 (6th Cir. Aug 17, 2006)

The court upholds a lower court summary judgment decision dismissing an airport authority's action for response costs incurred during an airport expansion project. The costs are not "necessary" and the authority fails to present "appropriate remedial alternatives" in a timely manner. The authority, therefore, fails to comply with the national contingency plan and is ineligible to recover under §107 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). In addition, because CERCLA provides an adequate legal remedy, the authority's common-law equitable indemnification claim is properly dismissed. Finally, Rule 26 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure creates a bright-line rule mandating disclosure of all documents, including attorney opinion work product, given to testifying experts. A magistrate judge, therefore, does not err in compelling the production of certain allegedly privileged documents.