District Court for the Eastern District of Washington
Full case name
Joseph A. Pakootas, an individual and enrolled member of the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation; Donald R. Michel, an individual and enrolled member of the Confederated Tribes of the Coville Reservation; Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation vs Teck Cominco Metals
The lead and zinc smelter, located 10 miles (16 km) north of the United States-Canadian border. The smelter has been in operation since the early 1900s. Teck Cominco has discharged approximately 10 million to 20 million tons of smelting byproduct, which contained "lead, arsenic and mercury" into the Columbia River and Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake in Washington.[3]
On June 1, 2011, Circuit Judges Arthur L. Alarcón, Andrew J. Kleinfeld, and Richard R. Clifton in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJoseph A. Pakootas, an individual and enrolled member of the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation; Donald R. Michel, an individual and enrolled member of the Confederated Tribes of the Coville Reservation; Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation vs Teck Cominco Metals, a Canadian corporation, Defendant–Appellee.[4]
The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) rejected Teck Metals' Petition for certiorari on June 10, 2019, in Teck Metals Ltd. v. The Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation.[6] The Whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit correctly concluded that holding Teck liable for its discharges in Canada was not an impermissible extraterritorial application of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act; correctly held that a State may exercise specific personal jurisdiction over a defendant because the defendant knew its conduct would have in-state effects, when the defendant's relevant conduct occurred elsewhere; and (3) whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit—in conflict with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit, and in tension with the opinions of the Supreme Court and several other circuits—correctly held that a defendant can be an “arranger” under CERCLA even if the defendant did not arrange for anyone else to dispose of or treat the waste.[6]
Implications for extraterritorial application of laws
^The full title of the case is Joseph A. Pakootas, Donald R. Michel (Plaintiffs) v. Teck Cominco Metals, Ltd. (Defendant), the party is United States of America, date was November 8, 2004, data source was InforMEA, the court was United States District Court Washington, presided by Justice(s)
McDonald, the Reference number was NO. CV-04-256-AAM, terms referenced include illegal trade, hazardous substance, ECOLEX Subjects include Water, Waste & hazardous substances, and legal questions
References
^Pakootas v. Teck Cominco Metals, 2578982 (District Court for the Eastern District of Washington 2004).
^Joseph A. Pakootas, an individual and enrolled member of the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation; Donald R. Michel, an individual and enrolled member of the Confederated Tribes of the Coville Reservation; Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation vs Teck Cominco Metals (United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit September 14, 2018), Text. No. 16-35742 D.C. No. 2:04-cv-00256-LRS
^ abTeck Metals Ltd. v. The Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation, 18-1160 (June 10, 2019) ("Petition for certiorari denied").