Question 1:

Post an original discussion as well as rebuttals and support of the postings of others; offering well-reasoned and articulate discussions including analysis of the relevant facts, legal issues, statutes, and precedent, and the rationale for your arguments on the legal implications of the following scenario: Gomer recently purchased and owns GIT-N-GO a convenience store and gasoline station in the city of Lizard Lick. The gasoline pumps were connected to underground gasoline storage tanks. One of the tanks had developed a leak at its top which allowed water to enter into the tank during rain storms. Following a customer complaint, Gomer called in his brother-in-law Sid (a bartender) to assess the situation. They took a sample from the tank and put a match to it and it did not ignite so they determined to effect repairs to the tank by first emptying the tank. They pumped out the contents into a storm drain and a sewer system pipe. Through the storm drain the gasoline and water mix from the tank flowed into a creek, killing the fish and causing the city to have to clean up the water in the creek. Through the sewer system, the gasoline and water mix from the tank flowed into the sewage treatment plant, causing the city to evacuate the plant along with two public schools on either side adjoining the sewer plant property. The city of Lizard Lick sent Gomer a notice that it would be filing charges and seeking both damages and criminal penalties for knowingly committing environmental violations. Gomer claims that he relied on Sid and had believed with all his heart that the tank was full of just water and that he was discharging only water into the drain and sewer pipe.