Opinion ID: 3012864
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Spill Act and Common Law Claims

Text: The District Court did not discuss Morton’s Spill Act claim or its common law contribution claim, but it nevertheless granted summary judgment to Tenneco on both. Because the Spill Act is the “New Jersey analog to CERCLA,” the standards for liability are the same. See SC Holdings, Inc. v. A.A.A. Realty Co., 935 F. Supp. 1354, 1365 (D.N.J. 1996); State of New Jersey v. Gloucester Environmental Management Servs., Inc., 821 F. Supp. 999, 1009 (D.N.J. 1993). Therefore, we vacate the District Court’s grant of summary judgment on the Spill Act claim for the same reasons that we vacate judgment on the CERCLA claim. We conclude, however, that the District Court’s grant of judgment to Tenneco on the common law contribution claim was appropriate because that claim is preempted by CERCLA Section 113(f). See In the Matter of Reading Co., 115 F.3d 1111, 1117 (3d Cir. 1997) (holding that CERCLA Section 113(f) preempts common law contribution claim).