Indiana Code 13-30-9-3. Allocation of costs of removal or remedial action
(1) The degree of care exercised by each party with respect to the release of the hazardous substance or petroleum caused or contributed to by each party.
Terms Used In Indiana Code 13-30-9-3
- Attorney: includes a counselor or other person authorized to appear and represent a party in an action or special proceeding. See Indiana Code 1-1-4-5
- Contract: A legal written agreement that becomes binding when signed.
- Equitable: Pertaining to civil suits in "equity" rather than in "law." In English legal history, the courts of "law" could order the payment of damages and could afford no other remedy. See damages. A separate court of "equity" could order someone to do something or to cease to do something. See, e.g., injunction. In American jurisprudence, the federal courts have both legal and equitable power, but the distinction is still an important one. For example, a trial by jury is normally available in "law" cases but not in "equity" cases. Source: U.S. Courts
- Statute: A law passed by a legislature.
(3) The risks posed by the hazardous substance or petroleum based on the use of the site at the time the hazardous substance or petroleum was released into the environment and the cost effectiveness of the removal or remedial action to address the risks.
(4) Whether a party’s acts or omissions violated a federal, state, or local statute, rule, regulation, or ordinance.
(5) The extent to which each party exercised actual and direct managerial control over the site where the hazardous substance or petroleum was released at the time of the release.
(6) Whether an award of reasonable costs, including attorney‘s fees, to a party involved in the environmental legal action is appropriate.
(7) Other equitable factors, including unjust enrichment, that the court determines are appropriate.
(b) Notwithstanding subsection (a), if parties have entered into a contract that allocates the costs or responsibility for the removal or remedial action, the terms of the contract control the allocation of costs between the parties to the contract. However, the terms of a contract may not affect the recovery of costs by the state unless the state is a signatory to the contract.
As added by P.L.59-1997, SEC.23.