Opinion ID: 794918
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: uniroyal's liability

Text: 58 Uniroyal argues that we should hold that it is not liable as an arranger under CERCLA, and thus overturn the panel's decision in Vertac XI. When a case has been decided by this court on appeal and remanded to the district court, every question which was before this court and disposed of by its decree is finally settled and determined. Klein v. Arkoma Prod. Co., 73 F.3d 779, 784 (8th Cir.1996). Absent intervening controlling authority, we are bound by the decision of the previous panel. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. Elgin Warehouse & Equip., 4 F.3d 567, 571 (8th Cir.1993). Uniroyal pointed to no new controlling authority, and thus the affirmance of the district court's finding of liability in Vertac XI is the law of the case. Because that holding is not clearly erroneous nor does letting it stand work a manifest injustice, we refuse to disturb it. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 4 F.3d at 570-71.