Case ID: so2d_699/html/1051-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

STATE of Florida, DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION, Appellant, v. EASTMAN CHEMICAL COMPANY, Appellee.
    No. 96-2969.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    Oct. 8, 1997.
    Agusta P. Posner, Assistant General Counsel, Tallahassee, for Appellant.
    Hunton & Williams and Rita A. Sheffey and Charles A. Perry, Atlanta, GA; Aker-man, Senterfitt & Eidson and Virginia B. Townes, Orlando, for Appellee.
    Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., LEVY, J., and BARKDULL, Senior Judge.
   SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge.

In entering summary judgment for the defendant Eastman Chemical Company, the trial court held as a matter of law that the manufacturer of a hazardous or toxic chemical is not liable under Florida’s mini-CERCLA Acts, sections 376.308 and 403.727, Florida Statutes (1995), for groundwater contamination which occurs when its product is shipped to a purchaser in trucks operated by independent contractors, arrives at the purchaser’s location — when, according to the sales agreement, the title passes to the buyer — and is then spilled while being unloaded from the trucks by the drivers and the buyer’s employees. We agree. ES Robbins Corp. v. Eastman Chem. Co., 912 F.Supp. 1476 (N.D.Ala.1995); Amcast Indus. Corp. v. Detrex Corp., 779 F.Supp. 1519 (N.D.Ind.1991), aff'd in part, rev’d in part, 2 F.3d 746 (7th Cir.1993), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 1044, 114 S.Ct. 691, 126 L.Ed.2d 658 (1994). See generally Florida Power & Light Co. v. Allis Chalmers Corp., 85 F.3d 1514 (11th Cir.1996).

Affirmed.