By Andrew H. Perellis, Alex W. Karasik, and Patrick D. Joyce

Seyfarth Synopsis: In a toxic tort class action stemming from automotive and dry cleaning facilities’ alleged contamination of groundwater near Dayton, Ohio, the Sixth Circuit affirmed an Ohio federal district court’s grant to certify seven common issues for classwide treatment under Rule

By Andrew H. Perellis, Patrick D. Joyce, and Craig B. Simonsen

iStock_000042612884_MediumSeyfarth Synopsis: The Eighth Circuit found that a class action could not be sustained in an environmental pollution case because “the class lacks the requisite commonality and cohesiveness to satisfy Rule 23.”

In Karl Ebert v.  General Mills, Inc., No.

By Andrew H. Perellis

Where individual questions overwhelm questions common to the class, a class action cannot be maintained. This simple concept has met with mixed results when applied to the question of whether a class action can proceed for claims based on contaminated groundwater underlying the property of putative class members.

The determination of

By Andrew H. Perellis and Craig B. Simonsen

The Third Circuit Court of Appeals yesterday resuscitated a proposed class action alleging the release of toxic emissions from a coal-fired power plant, finding that the Clean Air Act does not preempt certain state law claims brought by property owners. Bell, et al., v. Cheswick Generating Station

By Andrew H. Perellis and William R. Schubert

A recent Government Accountability Office report (GAO-13-252) called on EPA to improve its management of alternatives to National Priorities List placement.

The report found that at most sites that EPA deems eligible for NPL placement, EPA uses an alternative approach so that the site can be remediated

By Andrew H. Perellis

Can a toxic tort class action be maintained where class certification was denied in a materially similar case?

As noted in an item posted by our partners in The Workplace Class Blog, in Baker v Home Depot USA, Inc., No 11-CV-06768 (N.D. Illinois, Jan. 24, 2013), the court granted

Philip L. Comella recently published an article in the American Bar Association’s Environmental Litigation and Toxic Torts Committee Newsletter (July 2012) 13:2, entitled “Nine Tips for Taking an Effective Deposition in an Environmental Case.”

The article contains practical tips on how to get the most out of a deposition involving environmental claims, though the tips

By Andrew H. Perellis and Ilana R. Morady

After the U.S. Supreme Court issued its transformative decision in Dukes, et al. v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., No. 10–277 (June 20, 2011), holding that plaintiffs alleging employment discrimination had failed to demonstrate the existence of common questions sufficient for class certification under Federal Rule of Civil

By Andrew H. Perellis and William R. Schubert

The Montana Supreme Court recently held that the statute of limitations provided no defense to a defendant even though the plaintiffs had not asserted their nuisance and trespass claims until decades after the initial discovery of contamination.

In Burley v. Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway Co.