Skip to Content


Greenspoon Marder LLP’s Environmental practice group is observing an increasingly complex and ever-changing patchwork of federal, state, and local environmental laws and regulations. As highly experienced practitioners in environmental law, our attorneys have assisted clients with matters involving environmental litigation, Superfund, Brownfields, California’s Proposition 65, enforcement defense, regulatory and compliance counseling, and greenwashing.

The experience of Greenspoon Marder’s environmental attorneys, combined with the capabilities of attorneys throughout the firm’s broad range of practice areas, enables us to offer our clients comprehensive legal representation. Among the clients we serve are real estate investors and owners, retailers, industrial manufacturers, developers, financial institutions, technology companies, public utilities, transportation companies, materials recyclers, aerospace, food product manufacturers, pharmaceutical companies, governmental agencies, petroleum companies, and others.

The Environmental practice group’s experience encompasses:

  • Environmental Litigation
  • Superfund (CERCLA)
  • Brownfields
  • California’s Proposition 65
  • Environmental Regulatory and Compliance Counseling
  • Greenwashing

Recognitions of the members of Greenspoon Marder’s Environmental practice group include:

  • Lawdragon, Green 500 “Leaders in Environmental Law”, 2024
  • U.S. News and World Report, “Best Lawyers in America: Ones to Watch,” Environmental Law, 2022-2023

Published decisions of the members of Greenspon Marder’s Environmental practice group include:

  • City of Arcadia v. Dow Chemical Company, 2021 WL 3206806 (C.D. Cal. 2021), favorable summary judgment ruling dismissing product liability, nuisance, and trespass claims against pesticide manufacturer client.
  • Voggenthaler v. Maryland Square, LLC, 724 F.3d 1050 (9th 2013), environmental cost recovery case parsing the application of the BFPP exception to CERCLA liability.
  • KFD Enterprises, Inc. v. City of Eureka, 2012 WL 6554097 (N.D. Cal. 2012), favorable summary judgment ruling dismissing CERCLA, HSAA, nuisance, trespass, and state common law claims against commercial equipment manufacturer.
  • Heim v. Estate of Heim, 2012 WL 993681 (N.D. Cal. 2012), favorable motion to dismiss ruling dismissing CERCLA and HSAA claims against commercial equipment manufacturer.

Environmental Litigation

Greenspoon Marder’s environmental attorneys provide comprehensive counseling to clients facing complicated environmental disputes and liabilities in federal and state courts, federal and state administrative proceedings, and mediation and arbitration proceedings. We have advised, prosecuted, and defended claims based on Superfund (CERCLA), the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), the Clean Water Act (CWA), Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), California’s Proposition 65 (Prop. 65), and various federal and state common law environmental claims. We have prosecuted and defended environmental litigation involving cost recovery, contribution, nuisance, trespass, property damage, exposure, toxic tort, products liability, greenwashing, and insurance recovery.

Our Environmental Litigation experience includes:

  • Serving as outside environmental counsel for commercial equipment manufacturers and transportation companies, including providing advice, defense, and prosecution of environmental liabilities.
  • Defended pesticide manufacturer in 20+ complex coordinated cases in California alleging strict products liability, nuisance, trespass, and negligence for alleged groundwater contamination.
  • Counseled and defended aggregate mining company in CWA stormwater litigation, resulting in a de minimis penalty payment and limited stormwater permit modifications.
  • Challenged and successfully removed penalty judgment against roofing material manufacturer for alleged violations of Cal/OSHA workplace safety regulations.
  • Defended former facility operator from RCRA liability based on mootness principles because the facility at issue was already being remediated by the LARWQCB.
  • Represented transportation company in administrative proceedings brought by CUPA for hazardous materials incident to favorable resolution.
  • Defended petroleum pipeline operator from Oil Pollution Act (OPA) cost recovery claims based on defense of improper administrative remedy sought by USEPA.
  • Litigated RCRA active involvement standard to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals for commercial equipment manufacturer resulting in decision adopting standard for the Ninth Circuit.
  • Defeated proposed toxic tort class action at pleadings-stage that was brought against neighboring aerospace equipment manufacturer for over-the-fence emissions of facility.
  • Represented metals recyclers in CWA litigation through bench trial resulting in de minimis penalties for alleged violations of stormwater discharge permit.

Superfund (CERCLA)

Greenspoon Marder’s environmental attorneys specialize in providing cost-effective advice, negotiations, and litigation over federal Superfund (CERCLA) claims. We have defended clients against CERCLA claims prosecuted by United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), California’s Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), California Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCB), Nevada Department of Environmental Protection (NDEP), Missouri Department of Natural Resources (MDNR), among others. We have prosecuted claims on behalf of clients against real estate developers and redevelopers, petroleum companies, contractors, design and engineering companies, transportation companies, chemical companies, manufacturing companies, public utilities, and public agencies. Our specialized Superfund experience allows us to serve as outside CERCLA counsel for clients.

Our CERCLA experience includes:

  • Achieved early dismissal of all CERCLA, HSAA, Public Nuisance, Trespass, and common law claims against commercial equipment manufacturer alleged to be an arranger for the disposal of hazardous substances.
  • Prosecuted CERCLA and HSAA cost recovery claims against grading and excavation contractors as well as engineering design professionals based on failure to adhere to SCAQMD dust mitigation obligations resulting in the aerial deposition of hazardous substances on commercial and residential property in Santa Catalina Island.
  • Defended transportation company from CERCLA arranger and transporter liability based on company’s lack of active participation in selecting the destination waste disposal facility.
  • Advised multi-unit residential landowner on contamination investigation and remediation considerations to preserve CERCLA cost recovery claim against neighboring owner and operator PRPs.
  • Defended commercial owner from HSAA and state common law claims at bench trial resulting in complete defense verdict and allowing pursuit of attorneys’ fees.
  • Pursued CERCLA cost recovery claims in California, Washington, and Illinois on behalf of transportation company’s prior leasehold tenants, spur track operators, and upstream mining companies.
  • Coordinated environmental remediation and natural resource damages cost allocation for former aerospace facility operator where DOE and aerospace facility operator were both PRPs.
  • Prevailed on defensive summary judgment dismissing CERCLA cost recovery and contribution claims for groundwater contamination allegedly attributable to operations of dry-cleaning equipment manufactured by a commercial equipment manufacturer.
  • Counseled engineering consultant and developer on compliance with CERCLA covenant deferral provisions in order to obtain approval from USEPA and USACE to begin remediation at US military facility.
  • Prosecuted CERCLA cost recovery and contribution claims against former metals foundry operators at and around housing project in South Los Angeles.


Greenspoon Marder’s environmental attorneys advise clients redeveloping environmentally impacted properties, beginning with obtaining site closure through regulatory redevelopment approval. We have worked with commercial property redevelopers to consolidate contaminated parcels adjacent to one another into a larger parcel to serve as a logistics center over a formerly contaminated automotive manufacturing facility in Los Angeles.

Our Brownfields experience includes:

  • Advised redeveloper on preservation of Bona Fide Prospective Purchasers (BFPP) protections arising out of asset sale to venture capital firm for redevelopment project impacted by soil and groundwater contamination.
  • Defended former owner from CERCLA claims based on effective implementation of remediation efforts to achieve BFPP protections.

California’s Proposition 65

Greenspoon Marder’s environmental attorneys counsel and defend clients on consumer product exposure and warning issues created by the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, commonly known as California’s Proposition 65 (Prop. 65). We advise and counsel clients on the legal obligations Prop. 65 places on their business and consumer products in order to shield against potential liability to the California Attorney General or an environmental citizen-enforcement group. We litigate and defend clients from exposure and failure to warning claims brought under Prop. 65 to achieve efficacious outcomes for clients. Our experience litigating defense of Prop. 65 claims extend from pre-litigation notice through trial and involve consumer products, including rice, spices, pharmaceuticals, leather, paper, ceramics, aerospace equipment, metals, jewelry, health and beauty, and dietary supplements.

Our Prop. 65 experience includes:

  • Advised food product manufacturer on product labeling of products sold in California to comply with state environmental regulations, including Prop. 65.
  • Defended dietary supplement manufacturer from Prop. 65 claims based on evidentiary challenge to adequacy of protocol for sample testing, resulting in not being obligated to provide statutory warning.
  • Negotiated significantly diminished penalty payments for alleged product warning violations of Prop. 65 for retail product manufacturers.
  • Defended commercial equipment manufacturer from having any warning obligations under Prop. 65, resulting in the formal withdrawal of the Notice of Intent to Sue (NOI) served on the California Attorney General.
  • Counseled renewable energy company on product warning compliance considerations presented by Prop. 65.
  • Advised transportation company on California facility warning obligations for chemical exposures potentially triggering Prop. 65.

Environmental Regulatory and Compliance Counseling

Greenspoon Marder’s environmental attorneys routinely advise clients on federal, state, and local environmental regulatory matters and liabilities related to land, water, air, and waste. We have counseled clients on environmental matters involving Superfund (CERCLA), RCRA, CWA, FIFRA, and Prop. 65, and California state air regulations. We have handled challenges to proposed regulations, preparation of complex permit applications, and prosecution of appeals from adverse regulatory and administrative decisions.

Our Environmental regulatory and compliance counseling experience includes:

  • Advised multi-unit residential real estate holding company on sale of 28-acre site, formerly used as unpermitted landfill, to school district to be used as a future school site.
  • Counseled real estate investment trust on environmental due diligence related to commercial and industrial property holdings in California.
  • Represented communications device manufacturer in acquisition of large commercial/industrial facility requiring significant coordination with state regulators to permit continued operations.
  • Guided commercial property management company on insurance considerations for contamination liabilities arising out of properties in portfolio.


Greenspoon Marder’s environmental attorneys have advised and defended private-label product manufacturers from claims of greenwashing by various district attorneys in California. We utilize effective cost mitigation strategies available under California regulations to find cost-effective resolution strategies for clients facing greenwashing claims, including claims of false advertising, unfair business practices, and fraudulent concealment. We have advised product manufacturers on the federal and state regulatory labeling obligations to avoid claims of greenwashing.

Our greenwashing experience includes:

  • Negotiated resolution of greenwashing allegations asserted by the California Attorney General to permit skincare product manufacturer to sell their products in California with existing labeling.
  • Defended private-label product manufacturer from greenwashing and misrepresentation allegations for composability and biodegradability asserted by a collective of California District Attorneys.


Meet the Team Sub-Practices
News & Videos Quick Hits Series