Monsanto manufactured PCBs which were used by other manufacturers in electrical transformers. These transformers were then used by electric utility companies, and others companies, and then were eventually dismantled by yet other companies to recover valuable metals, with the PCBs draining onto the ground or otherwise leading to contamination. This led the United States to sue a collection of companies for cost recovery under CERCLA.As a result, the defendants in that action turned around and sued Monsanto for trespass, liability for abnormally dangerous activity, and product liability.

a) What type of law was being utilized by the U.S. EPA against the defendants?

b) What type of law was being utilized in the second set of lawsuits against Monsanto by the defendants?

c) Why were the types of law utilized different in the two situations? Explain why one would be used in the first situation and another in the second.

d) Would Monsanto be liable under any or all of these in the second set of lawsuits (product liability, abnormally dangerous activity, and trespass)? Why or why not?

e) What is CERCLA and why would the federal government sue the metals recovery companies under CERCLA and not Monsanto?

source: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/comprehensive_environmental_response_compensation_and_liability_act_(cercla)