According to PCS, the Fourth Circuit erred in adopting proof requirements for the divisibility of cleanup costs under CERCLA and compounded its error by reviewing U.S. Judge C. Weston Houck of the District of South Carolina's ruling for clear error rather than de novo. According to PCS, the ruling in Burlington Northern rejected the holding that proof is required to divide harm and apportion liability under CERCLA and stated that harm is divisible if there is a "reasonable basis" for determining contribution.
展开▼
