Arkansas Midland Railroad, Inc. v. ORG Chem Group, LLC
6:24-cv-06063
| W.D. Ark. | Jun 30, 2025Background
- Arkansas Midland Railroad, Inc. (ARMD) and ORG Chem Group, LLC (ORG Chem) entered into a lease whereby ORG Chem leased rail track from ARMD to store railcars containing materials related to chemical processing.
- The lease expressly prohibited the storage of hazardous waste and required ORG Chem to defend, indemnify, and hold ARMD harmless against any related regulatory action.
- ORG Chem stored materials on the leased track which both ADEQ and the EPA later determined to be hazardous waste, in violation of federal and state regulations and the lease terms.
- ARMD was alerted to EPA enforcement actions over the storage of hazardous waste, and was required to pay a substantial civil penalty after settling EPA claims.
- ARMD repeatedly demanded ORG Chem’s defense and indemnification as required by the lease, but ORG Chem failed to respond or provide any assistance.
- ARMD filed suit for breach of contract, seeking summary judgment on ORG Chem’s breaches; ORG Chem did not oppose the motion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Storage of hazardous waste | ORG Chem breached lease by storing hazardous waste | Not opposed | Lease was breached by storage of hazardous waste |
| Failure to defend | ORG Chem failed to defend ARMD in EPA enforcement action | Not opposed | Lease was breached by failing to defend |
| Failure to indemnify | ORG Chem failed to indemnify for EPA penalty paid by ARMD | Not opposed | Lease was breached by failing to indemnify |
| Entitlement to summary judgment | No genuine issue of material fact; ARMD entitled to judgment | Not opposed | Summary judgment for ARMD on all claims |
Key Cases Cited
- Torgerson v. City of Rochester, 643 F.3d 1031 (8th Cir. 2011) (articulates summary judgment standard)
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (1986) (describes the legal standard for summary judgment)
- Zimmerli v. City of Kansas City, Missouri, 996 F.3d 857 (8th Cir. 2021) (clarifies what constitutes a genuine issue of material fact)
- Enter. Bank v. Magna Bank, 92 F.3d 743 (8th Cir. 1996) (discusses summary judgment standards and burdens)
- Noland v. Comm. Mortg. Corp., 122 F.3d 551 (8th Cir. 1997) (discusses court's duty to assess unopposed summary judgment motions)
- Canada v. Union Elec. Co., 135 F.3d 1211 (8th Cir. 1997) (addresses review of summary judgment on undisputed facts)