Hinds Investments, L.P. v. Angioli
654 F.3d 846
| 9th Cir. | 2011Background
- Hinds owns two California shopping centers with groundwater contaminated by PCE; Hinds sues manufacturers of dry cleaning equipment under RCRA for contributing to waste disposal.
- Defendants are Multimatic entities, Street, and Hoyt who manufactured equipment used in dry cleaning and allegedly produced waste byproducts and instructed disposal.
- Hinds alleges defendants designed machines to create and discharge waste and provided manuals directing disposal into drains.
- District court dismissed under Rule 12(b)(6) as alleging only passive conduct and lacking active involvement.
- Court reviews de novo and applies plausibility standard to RCRA claims, ultimately holding contributor liability requires active involvement.
- Holding affirms district court: passive involvement by manufacturers is insufficient for RCRA liability.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether RCRA contributor liability requires active involvement. | Hinds argues broad contribution includes design and instructions. | Defendants contend any contribution by design qualifies. | Active involvement required. |
| Whether alleged design and manuals constitute active involvement in waste disposal. | Allegations show design and disposal guidance that cause waste disposal. | Passive manufacture and sale do not amount to disposal control. | Not sufficient; design alone not enough. |
Key Cases Cited
- Sycamore Indus. Park Assocs. v. Ericsson, Inc., 546 F.3d 847 (7th Cir. 2008) (active involvement required for liability)
- Interfaith Cmty. Org. v. Honeywell Int'l, Inc., 263 F.Supp.2d 796 (D.N.J. 2003) (affirms need for active participation)
- United States v. Aceto Agric. Chems. Corp., 872 F.2d 1373 (8th Cir. 1989) (control over waste disposal supports liability)
- Marathon Oil Co. v. Texas City Terminal Railway Co., 164 F.Supp.2d 914 (S.D. Tex. 2001) (control over disposal practices permits liability)
- United States v. Valentine, 885 F.Supp. 1506 (D. Wyo. 1995) (control over disposal decisions relevant to liability)
- Agricultural Excess & Surplus Insurance Co. v. A.B.D. Tank & Pump Co., 878 F.Supp. 1091 (N.D. Ill. 1995) (design alone not dispositive; distinguishable facts)