Sunburst School District No. 2, Plaintiffs, Respondents and Cross-Appellants v. Texaco, Inc.…

Summary

The court held that restoration damages for contamination of real property may exceed the property's pre-tort market value when diminution in value would not fully compensate the owners, and that CECRA does not preempt a common-law restoration claim. It upheld the exclusion of Texaco's expert testimony and the exclusion of DEQ-related evidence for compensatory damages, but held that DEQ-related evidence should have been admitted on punitive damages and remanded for a new punitive-damages trial; it also reversed the attorney-fee award. The court declined to decide whether a private constitutional damages action exists because common-law remedies were adequate. Justice Nelson, dissenting in part, would have upheld the punitive-damages verdict, and Chief Justice Gray, concurring in part and dissenting in part, likewise disagreed with the punitive-damages reversal and criticized portions of the court's restoration-damages reasoning.