EnergyNorth v. UGI Utilities

• Court: District Court, D. New Hampshire
• Decided: March 26, 2001
• Docket: CV-00-500-B
• Status: Published

Opinion

EnergyNorth v. UGI Utilities CV-00-500-B 03/26/01 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

EnergyNorth Natural Gas, Inc.

v. Civil N o . 00-500-B Opinion N o . 2001DNH069 UGI Utilities, Inc.

O R D E R

UGI Utilities, Inc. has moved to dismiss EnergyNorth Natural

Gas, Inc.’s claim for contribution under the Comprehensive

Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act (“CERCLA”),

as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 9601 et seq.

In United States v . Bestfoods, 524 U.S. 51 (1998), the

Supreme Court described the circumstances under which a parent

corporation may be held liable as an owner or operator under

CERCLA. There, the Court explained that a parent corporation may

be held liable for the actions of a subsidiary only if the

circumstances permit the court to pierce the corporate veil. See

id. at 63-64. The Court also held that a parent corporation may

be held liable for its own actions as an operator if it

“manage[d], direct[ed], or conduct[ed] operations specifically

related to pollution, that i s , operations having to do with the leakage or disposal of hazardous waste, or decisions about

compliance with environmental regulations.” Id. at 66-67.

Bestfoods does not alter the notice pleading system

established by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Fed. R.

Civ. P. 8(a)(2) requires only that a complaint include “a short

and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is

entitled to relief.” A detailed statement of the facts

supporting a claim ordinarily is not required in federal

practice. See Leatherman v . Tarrant County Narcotics

Intelligence & Coordination Unit, 507 U.S. 163, 168 (1993). When

EnergyNorth’s complaint is construed in its favor, it

sufficiently alleges that UGI Utilities is liable under CERCLA as

an operator based on its own conduct. Whether it will be able to

marshal sufficient evidence to support its allegations is an

issue that must be left for another day. Motion denied.

SO ORDERED.

Paul Barbadoro Chief Judge

March 2 6 , 2001

cc: Bruce Felmly, Esq. E Tupper Kinder, Esq.

-2-