465.255 Strict
liability for remedial action costs for injury or destruction of natural
resource; limited exclusions.
(1) The following persons shall be strictly liable for those remedial action
costs incurred by the state or any other person that are attributable to or
associated with a facility and for damages for injury to or destruction of any
natural resources caused by a release:
(a) Any owner or
operator at or during the time of the acts or omissions that resulted in the
release.
(b) Any owner or
operator who became the owner or operator after the time of the acts or
omissions that resulted in the release, and who knew or reasonably should have
known of the release when the person first became the owner or operator.
(c) Any owner or
operator who obtained actual knowledge of the release at the facility during
the time the person was the owner or operator of the facility and then
subsequently transferred ownership or operation of the facility to another
person without disclosing such knowledge.
(d) Any person
who, by any acts or omissions, caused, contributed to or exacerbated the
release, unless the acts or omissions were in material compliance with
applicable laws, standards, regulations, licenses or permits.
(e) Any person
who unlawfully hinders or delays entry to, investigation of or removal or
remedial action at a facility.
(2) Except as
provided in subsection (1)(c) to (e) of this section and subsection (4) of this
section, the following persons shall not be liable for remedial action costs
incurred by the state or any other person that are attributable to or
associated with a facility, or for damages for injury to or destruction of any
natural resources caused by a release:
(a) Any owner or
operator who became the owner or operator after the time of the acts or
omissions that resulted in a release, and who did not know and reasonably
should not have known of the release when the person first became the owner or
operator.
(b) Any owner or
operator if the release at the facility was caused solely by one or a
combination of the following:
(A) An act of
God. “Act of God” means an unanticipated grave natural disaster or other
natural phenomenon of an exceptional, inevitable and irresistible character,
the effects of which could not have been prevented or avoided by the exercise
of due care or foresight.
(B) An act of
war.
(C) Acts or
omissions of a third party, other than an employee or agent of the person
asserting this defense, or other than a person whose acts or omissions occur in
connection with a contractual relationship, existing directly or indirectly,
with the person asserting this defense. As used in this subparagraph, “contractual
relationship” includes but is not limited to land contracts, deeds or other
instruments transferring title or possession.
(3) Except as
provided in subsection (1)(c) to (e) of this section or subsection (4) of this
section, the following persons shall not be liable for remedial action costs
incurred by the state or any other person that are attributable to or
associated with a facility, or for damages for injury to or destruction of any
natural resources caused by a release:
(a) A unit of
state or local government that acquired ownership or control of a facility in
the following ways:
(A) Involuntarily
by virtue of its function as sovereign, including but not limited to escheat,
bankruptcy, tax delinquency or abandonment; or
(B) Through the
exercise of eminent domain authority by purchase or condemnation.
(b) A person who
acquired a facility by inheritance or bequest.
(c) Any fiduciary
exempted from liability in accordance with rules adopted by the Environmental
Quality Commission under ORS 465.440.
(d) An authority
that becomes the owner or operator of the facility as authorized in ORS
465.609.
(e) A receiver
appointed under ORS 37.020 to 37.410.
(4)
Notwithstanding the exclusions from liability provided for specified persons in
subsections (2) and (3) of this section such persons shall be liable for
remedial action costs incurred by the state or any other person that are
attributable to or associated with a facility, and for damages for injury to or
destruction of any natural resources caused by a release, to the extent that
the person’s acts or omissions contribute to such costs or damages, if the
person:
(a) Obtained
actual knowledge of the release and then failed to promptly notify the
Department of Environmental Quality and exercise due care with respect to the
hazardous substance concerned, taking into consideration the characteristics of
the hazardous substance in light of all relevant facts and circumstances; or
(b) Failed to
take reasonable precautions against the reasonably foreseeable acts or
omissions of a third party and the reasonably foreseeable consequences of such
acts or omissions.
(5)(a) No
indemnification, hold harmless, or similar agreement or conveyance shall be
effective to transfer from any person who may be liable under this section, to
any other person, the liability imposed under this section. Nothing in this
section shall bar any agreement to insure, hold harmless or indemnify a party
to such agreement for any liability under this section.
(b) A person who
is liable under this section shall not be barred from seeking contribution from
any other person for liability under ORS 465.200 to 465.485 and 465.900.
(c) Nothing in
ORS 465.200 to 465.485 and 465.900 shall bar a cause of action that a person
liable under this section or a guarantor has or would have by reason of
subrogation or otherwise against any person.
(d) Nothing in
this section shall restrict any right that the state or any person might have
under federal statute, common law or other state statute to recover remedial
action costs or to seek any other relief related to a release.
(6) To establish,
for purposes of subsection (1)(b) of this section or subsection (2)(a) of this
section, that the person did or did not have reason to know, the person must
have undertaken, at the time of acquisition, all appropriate inquiry into the
previous ownership and uses of the property consistent with good commercial or
customary practice in an effort to minimize liability.
(7)(a) Except as
provided in paragraph (b) of this subsection, no person shall be liable under
ORS 465.200 to 465.485 and 465.900 for costs or damages as a result of actions
taken or omitted in the course of rendering care, assistance or advice in
accordance with rules adopted under ORS 465.400 or at the direction of the
department or its authorized representative, with respect to an incident
creating a danger to public health, safety, welfare or the environment as a
result of any release of a hazardous substance. This paragraph shall not
preclude liability for costs or damages as the result of negligence on the part
of such person.
(b) No state or
local government shall be liable under ORS 465.200 to 465.485 and 465.900 for
costs or damages as a result of actions taken in response to an emergency
created by the release of a hazardous substance generated by or from a facility
owned by another person. This paragraph shall not preclude liability for costs
or damages as a result of gross negligence or intentional misconduct by the
state or local government. For the purpose of this paragraph, reckless, willful
or wanton misconduct shall constitute gross negligence.
(c) This
subsection shall not alter the liability of any person covered by subsection
(1) of this section. [Formerly 466.567; 1991 c.680 §9; 1991 c.692 §1; 2015
c.631 §9; 2017 c.358 §44]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
27
cases (
3 in the last 5 years), 1993–2023 · leading case:
Newell v. Weston, 946 P.2d 691 (Or. Ct. App. 1997).
Newell v. Weston, 946 P.2d 691 (Or. Ct. App. 1997).
· cites it 23× “” The latter statute provides: “Any person may seek contribution from any other person who is liable or potentially liable under ORS 465.255. *566 In resolving contribution claims, the court shall allocate remedial action costs among liable parties in accordance with ORS 465.”
Rudder v. Hosack, 506 P.3d 1156 (Or. Ct. App. 2022).
· cites it 35× “257, the court could assign responsibil- ity only to a party found to be liable under ORS 465.255. Therefore, the court did not err in allocating all liability to defendants.”
Newell v. Weston, 965 P.2d 1039 (Or. Ct. App. 1998).
· cites it 8× “Plaintiff also alleged a right to recover under ORS 465.255(1), which generally provides for strict liability for remedial action costs from any owner or operator of premises at which contamination occurred.”
Certain Underwriters v. Massachusetts Bonding & Ins., 230 P.3d 103 (Or. Ct. App. 2010).
· cites it 8× “327 likewise allows DEQ, through a written agreement, to “provide a party with a release from potential liability to *126 the state under ORS 465.255” if certain conditions are met.”
Goldingay v. Progressive Cas. Ins. Co., 306 F. Supp. 3d 1259 (D. Or. 2018).
· cites it 13× “ORS Chapter 465 (Strict Liability) ORS § 465.255 holds liable any person who became the owner or operator of a property associated with a release of hazardous substances into the environment "after the time of the acts or omissions that resulted in the release, and who knew or…”
Cash Flow Investors, Inc. v. Union Oil Co., 862 P.2d 501 (Or. 1993).
· cites it 8× “200(16) [set out below] include attorney fees incurred by a private party in a successful contribution proceeding under ORS 465.255 and 465.325(6) against another private party to recover environmental cleanup expenses?” The general rule in Oregon is that “[t]he right to recover…”
Catellus Dev. Corp. v. L.D. McFarland Co., 910 F. Supp. 1509 (D. Or. 1995).
· cites it 8× “s substances and SPTCo owned the Property while McFarland operated its creosote wooden pole treating facility; (2) Second Claim — under § 107(a) of CERCLA, Defendants are liable for Plaintiffs’ response costs because they owned and operated a facility from which hazardous…”
Ironwood Homes, Inc. v. Bowen, 719 F. Supp. 2d 1277 (D. Or. 2010).
· cites it 5× “255(l)(a)-(e) imposes strict liability for remedial action costs on an “owner or operator” of a facility; persons who “caused, contributed to, or exacerbated the release” of contaminants; and “any person who unlawfully hinders or delays entry to, investigation of or removal or…”
Graham v. State, 995 P.2d 1167 (Or. Ct. App. 2000).
· cites it 4× “The operative complaint alleged that the state as a party to a public contract, the city acting as the state’s agent, and the named contractors were jointly and severally liable on theories of negligence and strict liability *756 under ORS 465.255. Under both the negligence and…”
Martin v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 932 P.2d 1207 (Or. Ct. App. 1997).
· cites it 2× “In the second claim, the underlying plaintiffs alleged that Martin was strictly liable under ORS 465.255 and ORS 465.325. 3 Those statutes make a person liable if the person either (1) is an owner at the time of the acts or omissions that resulted in a release of pollutants, or…”
Century Indem. Co. v. Marine Grp., LLC, 848 F. Supp. 2d 1238 (D. Or. 2012).
· cites it 2× “The letter stated that “one or more participants in the Convening Group believe that you or your company are potentially responsible for response costs incurred and being incurred at the Site under Section 107(a) of CERCLA and ORS 465.255.” (Huynh Deck Ex. 1 at 2.) On January…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 465.255(1) — 7 cases
Newell v. Weston, 965 P.2d 1039 (Or. Ct. App. 1998).
“Plaintiff also alleged a right to recover under ORS 465.255(1), which generally provides for strict liability for remedial action costs from any owner or operator of premises at which contamination occurred.”
Certain Underwriters v. Massachusetts Bonding & Ins., 230 P.3d 103 (Or. Ct. App. 2010).
“327 likewise allows DEQ, through a written agreement, to “provide a party with a release from potential liability to *126 the state under ORS 465.255” if certain conditions are met.”
Newell v. Weston, 946 P.2d 691 (Or. Ct. App. 1997).
“” The latter statute provides: “Any person may seek contribution from any other person who is liable or potentially liable under ORS 465.255. *566 In resolving contribution claims, the court shall allocate remedial action costs among liable parties in accordance with ORS 465.”
Martin v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 932 P.2d 1207 (Or. Ct. App. 1997).
“In the second claim, the underlying plaintiffs alleged that Martin was strictly liable under ORS 465.255 and ORS 465.325. 3 Those statutes make a person liable if the person either (1) is an owner at the time of the acts or omissions that resulted in a release of pollutants, or…”
Rudder v. Hosack, 506 P.3d 1156 (Or. Ct. App. 2022).
“257, the court could assign responsibil- ity only to a party found to be liable under ORS 465.255. Therefore, the court did not err in allocating all liability to defendants.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 465.255(1)(a) — 2 cases
Rudder v. Hosack, 506 P.3d 1156 (Or. Ct. App. 2022).
“257, the court could assign responsibil- ity only to a party found to be liable under ORS 465.255. Therefore, the court did not err in allocating all liability to defendants.”
Cash Flow Investors, Inc. v. Union Oil Co., 862 P.2d 501 (Or. 1993).
“200(16) [set out below] include attorney fees incurred by a private party in a successful contribution proceeding under ORS 465.255 and 465.325(6) against another private party to recover environmental cleanup expenses?” The general rule in Oregon is that “[t]he right to recover…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 465.255(1)(b) — 2 cases
Goldingay v. Progressive Cas. Ins. Co., 306 F. Supp. 3d 1259 (D. Or. 2018).
“ORS Chapter 465 (Strict Liability) ORS § 465.255 holds liable any person who became the owner or operator of a property associated with a release of hazardous substances into the environment "after the time of the acts or omissions that resulted in the release, and who knew or…”
Rudder v. Hosack, 506 P.3d 1156 (Or. Ct. App. 2022).
“257, the court could assign responsibil- ity only to a party found to be liable under ORS 465.255. Therefore, the court did not err in allocating all liability to defendants.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 465.255(5) — 1 case
Rudder v. Hosack, 506 P.3d 1156 (Or. Ct. App. 2022).
“257, the court could assign responsibil- ity only to a party found to be liable under ORS 465.255. Therefore, the court did not err in allocating all liability to defendants.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 465.255(5)(a) — 1 case
Rudder v. Hosack, 506 P.3d 1156 (Or. Ct. App. 2022).
“257, the court could assign responsibil- ity only to a party found to be liable under ORS 465.255. Therefore, the court did not err in allocating all liability to defendants.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 465.255(5)(b) — 2 cases
Cash Flow Investors, Inc. v. Union Oil Co., 862 P.2d 501 (Or. 1993).
“200(16) [set out below] include attorney fees incurred by a private party in a successful contribution proceeding under ORS 465.255 and 465.325(6) against another private party to recover environmental cleanup expenses?” The general rule in Oregon is that “[t]he right to recover…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 465.255(6) — 1 case
Goldingay v. Progressive Cas. Ins. Co., 306 F. Supp. 3d 1259 (D. Or. 2018).
“ORS Chapter 465 (Strict Liability) ORS § 465.255 holds liable any person who became the owner or operator of a property associated with a release of hazardous substances into the environment "after the time of the acts or omissions that resulted in the release, and who knew or…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 465.255(l) — 1 case
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 465.255(l)(a) — 3 cases
Newell v. Weston, 946 P.2d 691 (Or. Ct. App. 1997).
“” The latter statute provides: “Any person may seek contribution from any other person who is liable or potentially liable under ORS 465.255. *566 In resolving contribution claims, the court shall allocate remedial action costs among liable parties in accordance with ORS 465.”
Ironwood Homes, Inc. v. Bowen, 719 F. Supp. 2d 1277 (D. Or. 2010).
“255(l)(a)-(e) imposes strict liability for remedial action costs on an “owner or operator” of a facility; persons who “caused, contributed to, or exacerbated the release” of contaminants; and “any person who unlawfully hinders or delays entry to, investigation of or removal or…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 465.255(l)(b) — 2 cases
Newell v. Weston, 946 P.2d 691 (Or. Ct. App. 1997).
“” The latter statute provides: “Any person may seek contribution from any other person who is liable or potentially liable under ORS 465.255. *566 In resolving contribution claims, the court shall allocate remedial action costs among liable parties in accordance with ORS 465.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 465.255(l)(c) — 1 case
Newell v. Weston, 946 P.2d 691 (Or. Ct. App. 1997).
“” The latter statute provides: “Any person may seek contribution from any other person who is liable or potentially liable under ORS 465.255. *566 In resolving contribution claims, the court shall allocate remedial action costs among liable parties in accordance with ORS 465.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 465.255(l)(d) — 3 cases
Newell v. Weston, 946 P.2d 691 (Or. Ct. App. 1997).
“” The latter statute provides: “Any person may seek contribution from any other person who is liable or potentially liable under ORS 465.255. *566 In resolving contribution claims, the court shall allocate remedial action costs among liable parties in accordance with ORS 465.”
Graham v. State, 995 P.2d 1167 (Or. Ct. App. 2000).
“The operative complaint alleged that the state as a party to a public contract, the city acting as the state’s agent, and the named contractors were jointly and severally liable on theories of negligence and strict liability *756 under ORS 465.255. Under both the negligence and…”
Ironwood Homes, Inc. v. Bowen, 719 F. Supp. 2d 1277 (D. Or. 2010).
“255(l)(a)-(e) imposes strict liability for remedial action costs on an “owner or operator” of a facility; persons who “caused, contributed to, or exacerbated the release” of contaminants; and “any person who unlawfully hinders or delays entry to, investigation of or removal or…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 465.255(l)(e) — 1 case
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.