Court Rejects Sherwin-Williams' Defense That Settlement Barred Contribution Claims

摘要

A federal appeals court Sept. 15 affirmed a lower court ruling that Sherwin-Williams Co. could not use a settlement agreement that resolved a government lawsuit over contamination at one hazardous waste site as a defense to separate claims for contribution over an adjacent site (City of Emeryville v. Robin-son, 9th Cir., No. 09-15018, 9/15/10).rnThe U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld a ruling by the U.S. District Court for the NorthernrnDistrict of California that said language in the settlement agreement Sherwin-Williams signed with the city of Emeryville, Calif., for the first site that barred contribution lawsuits did not shield the company from claims related to the adjacent site.