Re: @ Phaelonius-and this case has nothign whatsoever to do with accident liabilities
Author: BOB2
Date: 09-15-2018 - 13:28
Caveat Emptor!
Unfortunately for the CRA, it is responsible for its own failure to do "due diligence" in transferring ownership, and then, "after the fact", discovered the contamination, and went after the RR's, for a "stipulated" third parties actual likely liability (under State laws) for past failures, which had contaminated that RR property the CRA acquired, because the RR's have a connection and "deep pockets". And, this fairly liberal court (having nothing whatsoever to do, one way or the other, with our Great Leader???) said, rightly, "nice try" CRA.
This case has nothing to do with limiting RR liability from RR accidents and/or the contamination clean up costs after such accidents.