In 1947, long before garbage pickup was available in this rural area
In 1947, long before garbage pickup was available in this rural area, a farmer began burying his non-burnable garbage in a low spot on his land. Over the
years, containers with the remnants of oven cleaner, insecticide, paint thinner, nail polish remover, anti-freeze, and other hazardous wastes were thrown in the
pile. In 1965, the farmer placed soil over the heap, which at this point was quite smelly, planted grass and forgot about it. About 20 years after that, the land
was sold to a very wealthy homeowner who knew nothing of the garbage pit, and who constructed a multimillion-dollar home on the now-estate. As years
passed, rain deteriorated the buried containers and the chemicals gradually seeped into the ground. Eventually they made their way to the water table. In
2009, local landowners learned their land wells were contaminated and were able to trace the source to the farm-now-estate. Should the neighbors be
allowed to sue? Sue whom? The original farmer has long been dead and the current owner was unaware of the dump site. Should he be required to pay just
because he’s financially able to afford it? If not the current landowner, can they use a federal remedy? Is this a federal problem, or should the state have to
address this?
Sample Solution
The local landowners in this case face a difficult situation due to the contamination of their land wells. On one hand, they are aware that there is an identifiable source for the pollution, from a garbage dump created by the previous owner of their property. On the other hand, however, it may be difficult to recover damages or other remedies as both parties who created and allowed the environmental harm have passed away and are no longer present.
In cases such as these legal scholars have argued that under certain circumstances trespass-based liability could still be applicable (Reed & Thompson 2020). In particular , even if it can be argued that only negligence , instead intention , was responsible for causing damage then some form of liability would still exist(Reed & Thompson 2020 ). This means that depending on state law considerations individuals found currently in possession land which at some point caused harm could potentially be held accountable regardless whether or not they were actually aware any wrongdoing when assuming ownership .
Furthermore , despite being unable pursue action against either original farmer or current homeowner directly civil justice can sometimes obtained through federal agencies such as EPA’s Superfund program(EPA 2021). This government initiative provides support those affected by hazardous waste sites by providing resources for reclaiming polluted lands & cleaning up contaminated water sources (EPA 2021 ). However since passing statutes allow authority enforce regulations does not guarantee guilt innocent landowners must also remain somewhat cautious when confronting those involved with potential pollutions .
In conclusion , while challenging citizens should always bear in mind various options available to them when attempting seek justice after being subjected environmental harms . Depending on individual circumstances lawsuits may still possible based existing laws while additional aid may also exist through organizations like EPA’s Superfund program allowing greater chances attaining remedies even if culprit remains unidentified.
