Burlington Northern vs. SPIN-GALV, No. 04-5182 (10th Cir. 2007)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit PUBLISH September 24, 2007 Elisabeth A. Shumaker U N I T E D S T A T E S C O U R T O F A P P E A L S Clerk of Court TENTH CIRCUIT T H E B U R L IN G T O N N O R T H E RN A N D SA N TA FE R AILW A Y COMPANY, P l a in t i f f - A p p e ll a n t a n d C r o s s - A p p e ll e e , v. No. 04-5182, 04-5190 & 05-5137 ( C o n s o l i d a te d ) CHARLES B. GRANT; CHARLES B. GRANT REVOCABLE TRUST, D e f e n d a n ts - A p p e ll e e s a n d C ross-Appellants, and STATE OF OKLAHOMA; OKLAHOMA DEPARTMENT OF EN V IR ON M EN TA L Q U A LITY ; OKLAHOMA DEPARTMENT OF A G RIC ULTU RE, FO O D A ND FORESTRY, A mici C uriae. APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FO R TH E NO RTH ERN DISTRICT O F O K LAH OM A (D .C . N o. 03-C V -162-JH P-SA J) A l o k A h u j a , L a th r o p & G a g e , L .C ., K a n s a s C i t y, M i s s o u r i ( H u g h D . R i c e , R a i n e y, R o s s , R i c e & B i n n s , P L L C , O k l a h o m a C i t y, O k l a h o m a , a n d D a v i d E. Cow en, M cLeod, Alexander, Pow el & A pffel, Galveston, Texas, w ith him o n t h e b r i e f s ) , f o r P l a in t i f f - A p p e ll a n t a n d C r o s s - A p p e ll e e . L i n d a C . M a r t in , ( S a m P . D a n i e l a n d Y o u n g H . P e i w i th h e r o n t h e b r ie f s ) , D o e r n e r , S a u n d e r s , D a n ie l a n d A n d e r s o n , L .L .P . , T u l s a , O k l a h o m a , f o r D efendants-A ppellees and C ross-Appellants. J o h n T r e v o r H a m m o n s , A s s i s t a n t A t t o r n e y G e n e ra l, E n v i r o n m e n ta l P r o t e c t i o n U n i t , O k l a h o m a C i t y, O k l a h o m a , f i l e d a n a m i c u s b r i e f o n b e h a l f o f th e S t a te o f O k l a h o m a , t h e O k l a h o m a D e p a rt m e n t o f E n v i r o n m e n ta l Q u a l i t y, a n d t h e O k l a h o m a D e p a r t m e n t o f A g r i c u l t u r e , F o o d a n d F o r e s t r y, A mici C uriae. B e f o r e H E N R Y a n d B R I S C O E , C i r c u it J u d g e s , a n d R O B I N S O N , D i s t r i c t Judge.* B R I S C O E , C i r c u it J u d g e . Plaintiff Burlington N orthern & Santa Fe Railway Co. (BN SF) appeals ( C a s e N o . 0 4 - 5 1 8 2 ) t h e f in a l j u d g m e n t o f th e d is t r i c t c o u r t a n d a d d it i o n a l i n t e r l o c u to r y o r d e r s p r e c e d i n g f in a l j u d g m e n t. B N S F a l s o a p p e a l s a n o r d e r d i r e c ti n g i t t o p a y D e f e n d a n ts C h a r l e s G r a n t a n d th e C h a r l e s G r a n t R e v o c a b l e T r u s t ( G r a n t) a tt o r n e y f e e s ( C a s e N o . 0 4 - 5 1 9 0 ) . 1 G r a n t, i n t u r n , c r o s s - a p p e a ls th e d is m is s a l o f h is s p o lia tio n d e f e n s e ( C a s e N o . 0 5 - 5 1 3 7 ) . W e e x e r c i s e ju r is d i c t i o n p u r s u a n t t o 2 8 U .S .C . § 1 2 9 1 . I n c a s e * T h e H o n o r a b le J u l i e A . R o b i n s o n , U n i t e d S t a te s D i s t r i c t J u d g e f o r t h e D i s t r i c t o f K a n s a s , s i t t i n g b y d e s i g n a ti o n . 1 U n l e s s o t h e r w i s e n o te d , G r a n t i n c lu d e s b o t h G r a n t t h e in d i v i d u a l a n d the Charles Grant Revocable Trust. For ease of reference, the pronoun he is u s e d t o d e s c ri b e th e in c lu s iv e f o r m o f G r a n t. -2- numbers 04-5182 and 04-5190, w e REV ER SE and REM A N D for further proceedings. In case num ber 05-5137, w e A F FIR M . I A . F a c tu a l B a c k g r o u n d T h i s d is p u t e c e n te r s a r o u n d a t a r - l i k e m a te r i a l ( T L M ) t h a t B N S F a l l e g e s m o v e d o n to its p ro p e rt y f r o m a d ja c e n t p r o p e r t y o w n e d b y G r a n t. The property BN SF and G rant now ow n w as once the location of an oil r e f in e r y w h i c h o p e ra te d f ro m 1 9 1 7 u n t i l 1 9 3 2 . T L M w a s a w a s t e b y- p r o d u c t o f t h e r e f in e ry s o p e ra tio n . B N S F s p r o p e r t y i s l o c a t e d i m m e d i a t e l y e a s t , a n d a l l e g e d l y d o w n h i l l, f r o m G r a n t s p r o p e r t y. B N S F a l l e g e s t h a t i n t h e e a r l y 1 9 7 0 s G r a n t p e r s o n a ll y d i r e c te d , o r h a d r e a s o n t o k n o w o f , s u b s t a n ti a l e a rt h m o v i n g a n d c o n s t r u c ti o n o n h i s p r o p e r t y w h i c h B N S F a l l e g e s p r e c ip i t a te d th e m i g r a ti o n o f T L M o n t o i t s p r o p e r t y. B N S F c o n t e n d s t h e m i g r a ti o n o f T L M h a s c o n ti n u e d o v e r a p e ri o d o f d e c a d e s a s a r e s u l t o f r e p e a t e d h e a t e x p a n s i o n o c c u rr i n g e a c h s u m m e r . B N S F i n v e s t i g a te d th e T L M a n d m e t h o d s f o r removing it from its property and undertook the removal and off-site disposal of the material in July 2001, expending a total of $469,000 on this p r o j e c t. B N S F a l s o c o n s t r u c te d a 2 -3 f o o t b e r m o n t h e p r o p e r t y l i n e to s t o p t h e a l l e g e d c o n tin u e d m ig ra tio n o f T L M o n to its p r o p e r t y. B. Procedural Background -3- B N S F b r o u g h t s u i t a g a in s t G r a n t s e e k in g d a m a g e s a n d in j u n c ti v e r e li e f a s s e r t i n g v a r i o u s l e g a l t h e o r i e s , i n c lu d i n g c la im s u n d e r t h e c it i z e n s u i t p r o v i s i o n o f th e R e s o u r c e C o n s e rv a ti o n a n d R e c o v e r y A c t ( R C R A ) , 4 2 U .S.C. § 6972. BN SF also alleged the TLM w as a public and private n u i s a n c e , a n d s o u g h t i n j u n c ti v e r e li e f a g a in s t G r a n t i n t h e f o r m o f a b a te m e n t , a n d d a m a g e s f o r u n j u s t e n r i c h m e n t a s a r e s u l t o f B N S F s c le a n u p a c t i v i ti e s . T h e d is t r i c t c o u r t g r a n te d s u m m a r y j u d g m e n t i n f a v o r o f G r a n t o n several of BN SF s claim s. First, it found that BN SF had failed to present a g e n u in e is s u e o f m a t e r i a l f a c t o n t h e im m i n e n t a n d s u b s t a n ti a l e n d a n g e r m e n t e le m e n t o f its R C R A c la im . 4 2 U .S .C . § 6 9 7 2 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( B ) . N e x t, t h e d is t r i c t c o u r t c o n c lu d e d th a t B N S F c o u l d n o t p r o c e e d u n d e r O k l a . S t a t . t i t . 2 7 A , § 2 - 6 - 1 0 5 ( A ) , a n O k l a h o m a p u b l ic n u i s a n c e s t a t u t e , b e c a u s e t h e O k l a h o m a D e p a rtm e n t o f E n v i r o n m e n ta l Q u a li t y ( O D E Q ) h a d n o t i s s u e d a prior clean-up order. Third, the district court held that BN SF failed to present a triable issue to obtain injunctive relief on its abatem ent claim b e c a u s e t h e r e w a s n o p r e s e n t T L M m i g r a t io n , a n d b e c a u s e t h e c o u r t e x c lu d e d a s u n r e li a b le th e te s t i m o n y o f B N S F s e x p e rt r e g a rd i n g t h e l i k e l i h o o d o f f u tu re m ig ra tio n . B N S F p r o c e e d e d t o t r i a l o n i t s p r i v a te n u is a n c e a n d u n ju s t e n r i c h m e n t c la im s . A t t h e c lo s e o f B N S F s c a s e - i n - c h ie f , t h e d is t r i c t c o u r t e n te r e d -4- j u d g m e n t a s a m a t t e r o f l a w f o r G r a n t o n a l l r e m a i n i n g c l a i m s . S p e c i f i c a l l y, t h e d is t r i c t c o u r t h e ld t h a t G r a n t s r o l e in t h e c o n s t r u c ti o n a c ti v i t i e s o f th e 1 9 7 0 s d i d n o t s u b j e c t h i m t o p e r s o n a l l i a b il i t y b e c a u s e h e w a s p r o t e c te d b y t h e c o rp o r a te s h i e ld . T h e d is t r i c t c o u r t a ls o h e ld t h a t G r a n t c o u ld n o t b e h e ld p e r s o n a ll y l i a b le a s a s u c c e s s o r l a n d o w n e r b e c a u s e B N S F n e v e r d e m a n d e d t h a t G r a n t a b a t e th e a l le g e d T L M m i g r a t io n . A s f o r B N S F s c l a i m o f u n j u s t e n r i c h m e n t , th e d i s t r i c t c o u r t h e l d t h a t B N S F f a i l e d t o e s t a b li s h t h a t i t h a d d is c h a rg e d a n a f f ir m a tiv e d u ty f o r w h i c h G r a n t w a s r e s p o n s i b le . A l t e r n a ti v e ly, t h e d is t r i c t c o u r t d i s m i s s e d a ll o f B N S F s r e m a i n i n g c l a i m s o n th e g ro u n d th a t it h a d f a ile d to s e t f o r t h e v id e n c e o f its d a m a g e s . S p e c if ic a ll y, t h e d is t r i c t c o u r t e n te r e d ju d g m e n t a s a m a t t e r o f la w i n f a v o r o f G r a n t b e c a u s e it f o u n d th a t B N S F f a i l e d to p r o v e th e d im i n u t i o n i n v a lu e t h a t i t s p r o p e rt y s u f f e re d a s th e r e s u lt o f th e a lle g e d T L M m ig r a tio n . F u r t h e r , t h e d is t r i c t c o u r t h e ld t h a t B N S F s p r o o f o f d a m a g e s w a s d e f ic ie n t because it failed to identify w hat costs it had expended w ithin the applicable s t a t u t e o f lim ita tio n s . T h e d is t r i c t c o u r t a ls o m a d e v a r i o u s e v id e n ti a r y r u l i n g s w h i c h li m i t e d t h e e v i d e n c e B N S F c o u l d i n t r o d u c e a t tr ia l . S p e c i f i c a l ly, t h e d i s tr ic t c o u r t excluded the expert opinion of BNSF s expert Robert Brow nlee (Brow nlee), w h o w o u l d t e s t if y t h a t T L M m i g r a t e d f r o m G r a n t s p r o p e r t y o n t o B N S F s -5- p r o p e r t y. T h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t a l s o e x c l u d e d v a r i o u s p h o t o g r a p h s a n d v i s u a l d e s c r i p t i o n s w h ic h B N S F p ro f f e r e d to a d d r e s s th e a lle g e d T L M m ig r a tio n . F i n a l l y, a f t e r th e e n t ry o f j u d g m e n t a s a m a t te r o f l a w , t h e d i s tr ic t c o u r t a w a r d e d G ra n t $ 4 1 1 ,2 1 8 .9 9 in a tto r n e y f e e s . II BN SF appeals the district court s grant of summary judgment on its R C R A , a b a te m e n t a n d p u b li c n u is a n c e c la im s . B N S F a l s o a p p e a l s t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t s j u d g m e n t a s a m a t t e r o f la w o n i t s p r i v a te n u is a n c e a n d u n j u s t e n r i c h m e n t c la i m s , s e v e r a l o f t h e d i s t r ic t c o u r t s e v i d e n t i a r y r u li n g s , a n d th e d is t r i c t c o u r t s o r d e r a w a r d i n g G r a n t a tt o r n e y f e e s . G r a n t, i n t u r n , c r o s s - a p p e a l s t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t s d i s m is s a l o f i t s s p o l i a t i o n c l a i m . A. Summary Judgment W e review the district court s grant of summary judgment de novo, v i e w i n g t h e e v id e n c e in th e lig h t m o s t f a v o r a b le to th e n o n - m o v in g p a r t y. S e e R o b e r t s v . P r in t u p , 4 2 2 F .3 d 1 2 1 1 , 1 2 1 4 ( 1 0 t h C i r. 2 0 0 5 ) . S u m m a r y judgment is appropriate only if the pleadings, depositions, answ ers to i n t e r r o g a t o r i e s , a n d a d m i s s i o n s o n f i l e , t o g e t h e r w i t h t h e a f f i d a v i t s , i f a n y, s h o w t h a t t h e r e is n o g e n u in e is s u e a s to a n y m a te r i a l f a c t a n d th a t t h e m o v in g p a r t y i s e n ti t l e d to a j u d g m e n t a s a m a t t e r o f l a w . F e d . R . C i v . P . 56(c). 1. RCRA -6- B N S F s o u g h t r e li e f u n d e r R C R A , a c o m p r e h e n s i v e e n v ir o n m e n ta l s t a tu t e d e s i g n e d to m a k e c e r t a in t h a t s o l i d a n d h a z a r d o u s w a s t e s a r e n o t d i s p o s e d o f in a m a n n e r h a rm f u l to th e p u b lic h e a lth o r t h e e n v ir o n m e n t. S e e 4 2 U .S . C . § 6 9 0 2 ( a ) . T o m e e t t h e s e o b je c ti v e s , R C R A r e g u la te s t h e g e n e ra ti o n , h a n d li n g , t r e a tm e n t, s t o r a g e , t r a n s p o r t a ti o n , a n d d is p o s a l o f s o l id a n d h a z a r d o u s w a s t e s . S e e 4 2 U .S .C . § § 6 9 2 2 - 2 5 . T o e n s u r e e n f o r c e m e n t o f th e s e p r o v i s i o n s , C o n g r e s s c o n f e r r e d e n f o r c e m e n t p o w e r u p o n a f f e c te d U n it e d S t a te s c it i z e n s . R C R A s c it i z e n -s u i t p r o v i s i o n , 4 2 U .S.C . § 6972(a), provides: [ e ] x c e p t a s p r o v i d e d in s u b s e c ti o n ( b ) o r ( c ) o f th i s s e c ti o n , a n y p e r s o n m a y c o m m e n c e a c iv i l a c ti o n o n h i s o w n b e h a lf [ 1 ] ( B ) a g a in s t a n y p e r s o n , i n c lu d i n g t h e U n i t e d S t a te s a n d a n y o t h e r g o v e r n m e n ta l i n s t r u m e n ta li t y o r a g e n c y, t o t h e e x te n t p e r m i t t e d b y t h e e le v e n th a m e n d m e n t t o t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n , a n d i n c lu d i n g a n y p a s t o r p r e s e n t g e n e ra to r , p a s t o r p r e s e n t transporter, or past or present ow ner or operator of a treatment, s t o r a g e , o r d i s p o s a l f a c i l it y, w h o h a s c o n t r i b u t e d o r w h o i s contributing to the past or present handling, storage, treatment, transportation, or disposal of any solid or hazardous w aste w hich may present an im m inent and substantial endangerm ent to h e a lth o r t h e e n v ir o n m e n t[ .] 4 2 U . S . C . § 6 9 7 2 (a )( 1 )( B ) ( e m p h a s is a d d e d ) . S e c ti o n 6 9 7 2 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( B ) , r e q u ir e s : ( 1 ) t h e d e f e n d a n t m u s t b e a p e r s o n , i n c lu d i n g , t h o u g h n o t l i m i t e d to , o n e w h o w a s o r i s a g e n e r a to r o r transporter of solid or hazardous w aste, or one w ho w as or is an ow ner or o p e r a to r o f a s o l i d o r h a z a r d o u s w a s t e tr e a tm e n t, s t o r a g e , o r d i s p o s a l -7- f a c i l i t y; ( 2 ) t h a t t h i s d e f e n d a n t c o n tr i b u t e d to , o r is c o n tr i b u t i n g t o , t h e h a n d li n g , s t o r a g e , t r e a tm e n t, t r a n s p o r t a ti o n , o r d i s p o s a l o f s o l i d o r h a z a r d o u s w a s t e ; a n d ( 3 ) t h a t s u c h w a s t e m a y p r e s e n t a n im m i n e n t a n d s u b s t a n ti a l e n d a n g e r m e n t t o h e a lt h o r t h e e n v ir o n m e n t. S e e , e .g ., C o x v . C i ty o f D a l la s , T e x ., 2 5 6 F .3 d 2 8 1 , 2 9 2 - 9 3 ( 5 t h C i r. 2 0 0 1 ) . I n t h i s c a s e , o u r f o c u s i s u p o n t h e m a y p r e s e n t a n im m i n e n t a n d s u b s t a n ti a l e n d a n g e r m e n t t o h e a lt h o r t h e e n v ir o n m e n t la n g u a g e o f § 6 9 7 2 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( B ) . A s a th r e s h o l d m a tt e r , i t i s w e ll e s t a b li s h e d th a t t h e o p e r a t i v e w o r d i n § 6 9 7 2 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( B ) i s m a y ; t h u s , B N S F m u s t d e m o n s t r a t e T L M m a y p r e s e n t s u c h a d a n g e r . S e e I n te r f a it h C o m m u n i t y O r g a n iz a ti o n v . H o n e yw e ll I n t l , I n c ., 3 9 9 F . 3 d 2 4 8 , 2 5 8 ( 3 d C i r . 2 0 0 5 ) ; C o x , 2 5 6 F . 3 d a t 2 9 9 ; D a g u e v . C i ty o f B u r li n g t o n , 9 3 5 F .2 d 1 3 4 3 , 1 3 5 5 ( 2 d C i r. 1 9 9 1 ) , r e v d i n p a r t o n o t h e r g r o u n d s , 5 0 2 U .S . 1 0 7 1 ( 1 9 9 2 ) . T h i s e x p a n s i v e la n g u a g e i s i n t e n d e d to c o n f e r u p o n t h e c o u rt s t h e a u th o r i t y t o g r a n t a f f i r m a ti v e e q u it a b le r e li e f to t h e e x te n t n e c e s s a r y t o e li m i n a te a n y r is k p o s e d b y t o x i c w a s t e s . D a g u e , 9 3 5 F . 2 d a t 1 3 5 5 ( q u o t i n g U n i t e d S ta te s v . P r i c e , 6 8 8 F . 2 d 2 0 4 , 2 1 3 -1 4 (3 d C ir . 1 9 8 2 ) ) ( e m p h a s is in o r i g in a l) . The Supreme Court has also held that the phrase may present c o m m u n i c a t e s a n a d d i t io n a l i d e a , t h a t i s , i t q u i t e c l e a r l y e x c l u d e s w a s t e t h a t n o l o n g e r p re s e n ts th e h a rm c o n te m p la te d b y § 6 9 7 2 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( B ) . M e g h r i g v . K F C W e s t e r n , I n c ., 5 1 6 U .S . 4 7 9 , 4 8 5 - 8 6 ( 1 9 9 6 ) . A s s u c h , -8- u n d e r a n im m i n e n t h a z a r d c it i z e n s u i t , t h e e n d a n g e r m e n t m u s t b e o n g o in g , b u t t h e c o n d u c t t h a t c r e a te d th e e n d a n g e r m e n t n e e d n o t b e . C o x , 2 5 6 F . 3 d a t 2 9 9 ( q u o tin g C o n n . C o a s ta l F is h e r m e n s A s s n v . R e m in g to n A r m s C o ., 9 8 9 F . 2 d 1 3 0 5 , 1 3 1 6 ( 2 d C i r .1 9 9 3 ) ) ; s e e a l s o P r i c e v . U n i t e d S t a te s N a v y, 3 9 F . 3 d 1 0 1 1 , 1 0 1 9 ( 9 th C i r . 1 9 9 4 ) ( h o l d i n g t h a t R C R A d o e s n o t r e q u ir e a c t u a l h a r m , b u t th r e a t e n e d o r p o t e n t i a l h a r m w i ll s u f f i c e ) . Second, the term endangerment has been interpreted by courts to m e a n a t h r e a t e n e d o r p o te n ti a l h a r m , t h u s , i t i s n o t n e c e s s a r y t h a t B N S F s h o w p r o o f o f a c tu a l h a r m t o h e a lt h o r t h e e n v ir o n m e n t. S e e D a g u e , 9 3 5 F . 2 d a t 1 3 5 5 - 5 6 ; U n i te d S t a t e s v . P r ic e , 6 8 8 F .2 d a t 2 1 1 . I n o t h e r w o r d s , i n j u n c ti v e r e li e f is a u th o r i z e d w h e n th e r e m a y b e a ri s k o f h a r m . T h i s g i v e s e f f e c t t o C o n g r e s s i n t e n t to c o n f e r u p o n t h e c o u rt s t h e a u th o r i t y t o g r a n t a f f i r m a ti v e e q u it a b le r e li e f to t h e e x te n t n e c e s s a r y t o e li m i n a te a n y r is k p o s e d b y t o x i c w a s t e s . D a g u e , 9 3 5 F .2 d a t 1 3 5 5 ( e m p h a s i s i n o r ig i n a l ) . T h i r d , t h e te r m im m i n e n t is n o t d e f in e d b y R C R A , h o w e v e r, t h e Supreme Court has held that [a]n endangerment can only be imminent if i t t h r e a te n s t o o c c u r i m m e d ia te ly[ .] M e g h r i g , 5 1 6 U .S . a t 4 8 5 ( q u o t a ti o n s o m i t t e d ) . N o n e th e le s s , a f in d i n g o f im m i n e n c y d o e s n o t r e q u ir e a s h o w i n g t h a t a c tu a l h a r m w i l l o c c u r i m m e d ia te ly a s l o n g a s t h e r i s k o f t h r e a te n e d h a r m i s p r e s e n t. I d . a t 4 8 5 - 8 6 ( h o l d i n g t h a t th e r e m u s t b e a threat which is present now, although the impact of the threat may not be felt -9- u n t i l l a te r ) ( q u o t a ti o n s o m i t t e d ) . I n o t h e r w o r d s , [ a ] n im m i n e n t h a z a r d m a y b e d e c l a r e d a t a n y p o i n t i n a c h a i n o f e v e n t s w h i c h m a y u l t im a t e l y r e s u l t in h a r m t o t h e p u b l i c . D a v i s v . S u n O i l C o . , 1 4 8 F . 3 d 6 0 6 , 6 1 0 ( 6 t h C i r . 1 9 9 8 ) ( q u o t i n g D a g u e , 9 3 5 F . 2 d a t 1 3 5 5 - 5 6 ) ; s e e a l s o U n i t e d S t a te s N a v y, 3 9 F . 3 d a t 1 0 1 9 . I m m i n e n c e , t h u s , r e f e r s to t h e n a tu r e o f th e th r e a t r a t h e r t h a n i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f t h e t i m e w h e n t h e e n d a n g e r m e n t i n i t ia l l y a r o s e . U n i te d S t a te s N a v y, 3 9 F .3 d a t 1 0 1 9 ( c i ta t io n o m i tt e d ) . F i n a l l y, t h e w o r d s u b s t a n t i a l i s n o t d e f i n e d i n R C R A o r i t s l e g is l a ti v e h is t o r y. N o n e th e le s s , r e le v a n t c a s e la w h a s h e ld t h a t a n e n d a n g e r m e n t i s s u b s t a n ti a l u n d e r R C R A w h e n it i s s e r i o u s . I n t e r f a it h , 3 9 9 F . 3 d a t 2 5 9 ; P a r k e r v . S c r a p M e ta l P r o c e s s o r s , I n c ., 3 8 6 F . 3 d 9 9 3 , 1 0 1 5 (11th Cir. 2004); Cox, 256 F.3d at 300. This does not necessitate q u a n t if i c a t io n o f e n d a n g e r m e n t , a s a n e n d a n g e r m e n t is s u b s t a n t ia l w h e r e t h e r e is r e a s o n a b le c a u s e f o r c o n c e r n t h a t s o m e o n e o r s o m e th i n g m a y b e e x p o s e d to r i s k o f h a rm b y r e le a s e , o r th r e a te n e d re le a s e , o f h a z a r d o u s s u b s t a n c e s i n t h e e v e n t r e m e d i a l a c ti o n i s n o t t a k e n . S e e C a li f . D e p t. o f T o x i c S u b s t a n c e s C o n t r o l v . I n t e r s t a te N o n - F e r r o u s C o r p ., 2 9 8 F . S u p p . 2 d 9 3 0 , 9 8 0 ( E .D . C a l. 2 0 0 3 ) . A s s u c h , g i v e n R C R A s l a n g u a g e a n d p u r p o s e , i f a n e r r o r i s t o b e m a d e i n a p p lyi n g t h e e n d a n g e r m e n t s t a n d a rd , t h e e rr o r m u s t b e m a d e i n f a v o r o f p r o t e c ti n g p u b l i c h e a l t h , w e lf a r e a n d th e e n v ir o n m e n t. I n t e r f a it h , 3 9 9 F . 3 d a t 2 5 9 ( q u o t i n g U n i t e d S t a te s v . -10- C o n s e r v a t io n C h e m i c a l C o ., 6 1 9 F . S u p p . 1 6 2 , 1 9 4 ( W .D . M o .1 9 8 5 ) ) . H e r e , t h e d i s tr ic t c o u r t f o u n d t h a t t h e T L M r e m o v e d f r o m B N S F s p r o p e r t y a n d r e m a i n i n g o n G r a n t s p r o p e r t y f a i le d t o s a t is f y t h e R C R A s i m m i n e n c y r e q u ir e m e n t . T h e d is t r i c t c o u r t c o n c lu d e d im m i n e n c y h a d n o t b e e n e s t a b li s h e d b e c a u s e ( 1 ) B N S F f a i l e d to p o i n t t o a n y p e r s o n w h o h a d been injured by TLM or to any study establishing the material threatened to im m e d ia te ly c a u s e h a rm t o a p e rs o n o r t h e e n v ir o n m e n t, ( 2 ) n e it h e r t h e O D E Q o r t h e E n v i r o n m e n ta l P r o t e c ti o n A g e n c y ( E P A ) h a d e v e r o r d e r e d th e TLM removed, and (3) BN SF monitored the alleged migration of the TLM o n t o i t s p r o p e r t y f o r ye a rs w i t h o u t a c ti n g . B N S F c l a i m s t h e d i s tr ic t c o u r t s r a t io n a l e f o r e n t e r in g s u m m a r y j u d g m e n t o n t h i s c la im i s e r r o n e o u s . W e a g re e . B N S F c o r r e c tl y p o i n t s o u t that it is irrelevant when the TLM w as deposited on the property and equally i rr e l e v a n t h o w l o n g B N S F m o n i to r e d t h e T L M b e f o r e a c t in g . S e e P a r k e r , 3 8 6 F . 3 d a t 1 0 1 4 ( T h e s e c t i o n a p p l i e s r e t r o a c t i v e l y t o p a s t v i o la t i o n s , s o l o n g a s t h o s e v io la tio n s a re a p r e s e n t th r e a t to h e a lth o r t h e e n v ir o n m e n t. ). A l s o , t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t e r r e d b y l i m i t in g i t s c o n s i d e r a t i o n t o o n l y i n j u r y t o p e r s o n s w h e n § 6 9 7 2 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( B ) a ls o r e q u ir e s c o n s i d e r a ti o n o f im m i n e n t a n d s u b s t a n t ia l e n d a n g e r m e n t to t h e e n v i ro n m e n t . S e c t io n 6 9 7 2 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( B ) s phrasing in the disjunctive indicates proof of harm to a living population is u n n e c e s s a r y t o s u c c e e d o n th e m e r i t s . S e e I n t e r f a it h , 3 9 9 F . 3 d a t 2 5 9 . -11- M o r e o v e r , s u c h a h o l d i n g w o u l d r e m o v e f r o m c o n s i d e r a t io n T L M s p o t e n ti a l h a r m t o h e a lt h o r t h e e n v ir o n m e n t. S e e U n i t e d S t a te s N a v y, 3 9 F . 3 d a t 1 0 1 9 ( h o l d i n g t h a t R C R A d o e s n o t r e q u ir e a c t u a l h a r m , b u t t h r e a te n e d o r p o t e n ti a l h a r m ) . L i k e w i s e , a f in d i n g o f im m i n e n c y d o e s n o t r e q u ir e a s h o w i n g t h a t a c tu a l h a r m w ill o c c u r i m m e d ia te ly, a s l o n g a s t h e r i s k o f t h r e a t e n e d h a r m e x i s t s . S e e M e g h r i g , 5 1 6 U .S . a t 4 8 5 - 8 6 . F i n a l l y, p r i o r a d m i n i s t r a ti v e a c t i o n o n t h e p a rt o f th e O D E Q o r t h e E P A i s s i m p l y n o t a p r e r e q u is i t e to a c it i z e n s u i t . I n f a c t , n o c it i z e n s u i t c a n p ro c e e d i f e it h e r t h e E P A o r t h e S ta te h a s c o m m e n c e d , a n d is d ilig e n tly p r o s e c u tin g , a s e p a ra te e n f o r c e m e n t a c ti o n . I d . a t 4 8 6 . I n s h o r t , t h e d is t r i c t c o u r t r e a d too narrow ly the imminent and substantial endangerment prong of 42 U .S.C . § 6972(a)(1)(B ). W e also conclude that there are genuine issues of material fact as to w h e th e r T L M m a y p r e s e n t a n im m i n e n t a n d s u b s t a n ti a l e n d a n g e r m e n t t o h e a lt h o r t h e e n v ir o n m e n t. 4 2 U .S . C . § 6 9 7 2 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( B ) . B y w a y o f e x a m p l e , v a r i o u s o r g a n i z a t io n s , i n c l u d i n g t h e E P A , h a v e g e n e r a t e d r e p o r ts o v e r a n u m b e r o f ye a rs w h i c h h a v e a n a lyz e d T L M s a m p l e s t a k e n f r o m b o t h o n a n d n e a r G r a n t s p r o p e r t y. M a n y o f th e s e r e p o r t s i n d i c a te th a t T L M c o n ta in s c a rc in o g e n s i n q u a n ti t i e s g r e a te r t h a n th o s e s u g g e s t e d b y t h e E P A . P e r h a p s t h e m o s t p e r ti n e n t o f t h e s e s tu d i e s is a 2 0 0 3 r e p o r t c o n d u c t e d a t th e b e h e s t o f B N S F ( th e E R M R e p o r t ) w h i c h a n a l yz e d s a m p l e s o f T L M r e m o v e d -12- f r o m G r a n t s p r o p e r t y. T h e E R M R e p o r t s t a te s t h a t t h e T L M s a m p l e d r e v e a l s t h e p r e s e n c e o f c e r t a in c o n ta m i n a n ts w h i c h B N S F s e x p e rt , D i a n e D e L i l li o , t e s t i f i e d w e r e p r e s e n t i n l e v e l s e x c e e d i n g E P A h u m a n h e a l t h s c r e e n in g l e v e ls f o r i n d u s t r i a l o u t d o o r w o r k e r s . D e L i l l i o t e s t i f ie d f u r t h e r t h a t t h e s e c o n ta m i n a n ts w e r e a c a n c e r r i s k . L i k e w i s e , B r o w n l e e te s t i f ie d that this TLM : c o n ta in [ s ] e le v a te d le v e ls o f k n o w n c a rc in o g e n s i n e x c e s s o f current EPA Region 6 human health screening levels specific to industrial outdoor workers soil concentrations. The materials also pose a threat to pets and w ildlife as they are completely e x p o s e d . T h e p r e s e n c e o f t h i s m a t e r i a l o n t h e G r a n t p r o p e r t y, w h i c h is t h r e a te n in g t o r e c o n ta m i n a te th e B N S F p r o p e r t y[ ,] i s a n i m m i n e n t a n d s u b s t a n ti a l h e a lth r i s k a n d e n d a n g e r m e n t t o h u m a n h e a lt h a n d th e e n v ir o n m e n t. T h e p r e s e n c e o f th i s e x p o s e d material and its eruptive nature constitutes a potential threat to s to r m w a t e r ru n o f f a n d w a t e r s o f t h e U n i te d S t a t e s . Appx. at 230. A lthough G rant vigorously argues that Brow nlee later retracted this t e s t i m o n y, w e c o n c l u d e t h a t t h e r e c o r d d o e s n o t s u p p o r t s u c h a r e a d i n g . W e a ls o r e je c t G r a n t s a r g u m e n ts a s k i n g u s t o w e ig h t h e c re d ib i l i t y o f B r o w n l e e s t e s t i m o n y. A n d e r s o n v . L i b e r t y L o b b y, I n c ., 4 7 7 U .S . 2 4 2 , 2 5 5 ( 1 9 8 6 ) ( h o l d i n g t h a t [ c ] r e d ib i l i t y d e te r m i n a ti o n , t h e w e ig h i n g o f th e e v i d e n c e , a n d t h e d r a w i n g o f l e g i ti m a t e i n f e r e n c e s f r o m t h e f a c t s a r e j u r y f u n c ti o n s , n o t t h o s e o f a j u d g e ). T h e r e f o re , b a s e d o n th i s a n d a d d it i o n a l e v id e n c e i n t h e r e c o rd , w e c o n c l u d e th a t t h e r e a re g e n u in e is s u e s o f m a te r i a l -13- f a c t a s t o w h e th e r t h e T L M o n G r a n t s p r o p e r ty m a y p r e s e n t a n im m i n e n t a n d s u b s t a n ti a l e n d a n g e r m e n t to h e a lth o r t h e e n v ir o n m e n t. 4 2 U .S .C . § 6 9 7 2 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( B ) . A c c o rd i n g l y, w e r e v e rs e th e d is t r i c t c o u r t a n d r e m a n d B N SF s R C R A claim for further proceedings. 2. Abatem ent BN SF next argues that the district court erred in dismissing its claim for injunctive relief seeking removal of the TLM from G rant s property to p r e v e n t i t s f u tu r e m i g r a ti o n . A s a th r e s h o l d m a tt e r , w e r e s o l v e tw o i s s u e s raised by G rant. First w e conclude that this issue has been properly p r e s e r v e d f o r a p p e a l . S e c o n d , i t i s w e ll - e s t a b li s h e d th a t w e r e v ie w t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t s d i s m i s s a l o f B N S F s c la im a t t h e s u m m a r y j u d g m e n t s t a g e d e n o v o a n d n o t, a s G r a n t s u g g e s t s , f o r c le a r e r r o r . S e e R o b e r t s , 4 2 2 F . 3 d a t 1214 (review ing district court s grant of sum m ary judgm ent de novo). W e conclude that the district court erred in dismissing BN SF s claim for injunctive relief. To the extent the district court read O klahoma law to r e q u i re a n o n - g o i n g T L M m i g r a t io n a s a p r e r e q u i s it e to a p l a in t if f s o b t a i n i n g i n j u n c t iv e r e l i e f , i t e r r e d a s a m a t t e r o f l a w . U n d e r O k l a h o m a law , injunctive relief is proper upon a show ing that there is a reasonable p r o b a b il i t y t h a t t h e in j u r y s o u g h t t o b e p r e v e n te d w i l l o c c u r if n o in j u n c ti o n i s i s s u e d ; a m e r e f e a r o r a p p r e h e n s i o n o f in j u r y i s i n s u f f ic ie n t. S e e S h a r p v . 2 5 1 s t S t r e e t L a n d f i l l , I n c ., 9 2 5 P .2 d 5 4 6 , 5 4 9 ( O k l a . 1 9 9 6 ) . M o r e o v e r , -14- i n s o f a r a s t h e d i s tr ic t c o u r t d i s c o u n t e d th e t e s t i m o n y o f B N S F s w i t n e s s , J e n n if e r H u r l e y, a s u n r e li a b le , b e c a u s e it w a s b a s e d u p o n a v is u a l i n s p e c ti o n of the TLM in relation to the berm, rather than a more scientific e x a m i n a ti o n , t h e d is t r i c t c o u r t e r r e d . S e e L i b e r t y L o b b y, I n c ., 4 7 7 U .S . a t 2 5 5 ; s e e a l s o S e a m o n s v . S n o w , 2 0 6 F .3 d 1 0 2 1 , 1 0 2 6 ( 1 0 t h C i r. 2 0 0 0 ) ( [ I ] t i s a x i o m a t i c t h a t a j u d g e m a y n o t e v a l u a t e t h e c r e d i b i l it y o f w i t n e s s e s i n d e c i d i n g a m o tio n f o r s u m m a ry ju d g m e n t. ) . W e a ls o a g r e e w i t h B N S F t h a t t h e re a re g e n u in e is s u e s o f m a te r i a l f a c t r e m a i n i n g . I n O k l a h o m a , e n ti t l e m e n t t o i n j u n c ti v e r e li e f m u s t b e e s ta b l is h e d b y c l e a r a n d c o n v i n c i n g e v i d e n c e a n d t h e i n ju r y a l l e g e d m u s t n o t b e s p e c u la tiv e . T h o m a s v . H a m p to n , 5 8 3 P .2 d 5 0 6 , 5 0 7 ( O k la . 1 9 7 8 ) . T h e S u p r e m e C o u r t h a s h e ld t h a t th e in q u i r y i n v o l v e d in a r u l i n g o n a motion for summary judgment or for a directed verdict necessarily i m p l i c a te s t h e s u b s t a n ti v e e v id e n ti a r y s t a n d a rd o f p r o o f th a t w o u l d a p p ly a t t h e tr i a l o n t h e m e r i t s . L i b e r t y L o b b y, I n c ., 4 7 7 U .S . a t 2 5 2 . T h e r e f o re , b e c a u s e O k l a h o m a l a w r e q u ir e s c le a r a n d c o n v in c in g p r o o f b e f o r e a n u i s a n c e c a n b e e n jo i n e d , w e r e v ie w t h e g r a n t o f s u m m a r y j u d g m e n t o n t h e i s s u e o f in j u n c ti v e r e li e f in l i g h t o f th a t s t a n d a rd . C l e a r a n d c o n v in c in g e v id e n c e i s t h a t m e a s u r e o r d e g r e e o f p r o o f . . . p r o d u c [ in g ] i n t h e m i n d o f t h e tr i e r o f f a c t a f ir m b e li e f o r c o n v ic ti o n a s t o t h e tr u t h o f th e a ll e g a ti o n s o u g h t t o b e e s t a b li s h e d . M a tt e r o f C .G ., 6 3 7 P . 2 d 6 6 , 7 1 , n . 1 2 ( O k l a . -15- 1981). W h e n a p p lyi n g t h i s s t a n d a rd t o t h e r e c o rd p r e s e n te d , w e c o n c l u d e th a t B N S F s e v i d e n c e w a s s u f f i c ie n t to c r e a t e a t ri a b l e i s s u e a s t o w h e t h e r th e r e i s a r e a s o n a b l e p r o b a b i l it y t h a t T L M o n G r a n t s p r o p e r t y w i l l m i g r a t e o n t o t h e p r o p e r t y o f B N S F . F i r s t , B N S F s e x p e rt s , H u r l e y a n d B r o w n l e e , u n a m b i g u o u s l y a s s e r t t h a t t h e T L M h a s c o n ti n u e d to m o v e to w a r d s t h e b e r m , a n d a g a i n s t i t , a n d th a t, a b s e n t i n t e r v e n ti o n , i t t h r e a te n s t o o v e r t o p t h e berm. N ext, B N SF points to considerable evidence in the record of past T L M m i g r a t i o n o n t o B N S F s p r o p e r t y, a n i s s u e w h i c h t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t d i d n o t r e s o l v e a n d a b o u t w h i c h th e r e i s v i g o r o u s d i s p u t e . T h i rd , B N S F a l s o p o i n t s t o s t u d i e s o f s o i l b o r i n g s w h ic h s h o w s u b s t a n ti a l r e m a i n i n g T L M d e p o s i t s n e a r t h e b e r m . F i n a l l y, b o t h B N S F s a n d G r a n t s e x p e r t s s e t f o r t h t h e m e c h a n i c s o f T L M m i g r a ti o n : h e a t , e x p a n s i o n , a n d s e tt l i n g t o t h e lo w e s t e l e v a t io n . T a k e n t o g e t h e r , w e a g r e e t h a t th i s e v i d e n c e s u g g e s ti n g p a s t T L M m i g r a ti o n , c u r r e n t T L M m i g r a tio n a g a in s t t h e b e rm , a m p l e q u a n ti t i e s o f T L M n e x t t o t h e b e r m , a n d t h e m e c h a n i c s o f T L M m i g r a ti o n p r e s e n t s a t r i a b le is s u e a s t o w h e th e r t h e r e is a r e a s o n a b le p r o b a b il i t y t h a t t h e T L M o n G r a n t s l a n d w ill o v e rt o p th e b e r m a n d c o n ta m in a te B N S F s la n d . A c c o rd i n g l y, w e r e v e rs e th e d is t r i c t c o u r t a n d r e m a n d t h i s i s s u e f o r f u r t h e r p r o c e e d i n g s o n th e a b a te m e n t is s u e . 3. Public Nuisance -16- T h e d is t r i c t c o u r t g r a n te d s u m m a r y j u d g m e n t i n f a v o r o f G r a n t o n B N S F s p u b l i c n u is a n c e c la im b r o u g h t p u r s u a n t t o O k l a . S t a t. t i t . 2 7 A , § 2 6 - 1 0 5 o f t h e O k l a h o m a E n v i r o n m e n t a l Q u a l i ty C o d e b a s e d u p o n i t s c o n c lu s i o n t h a t a n O D E Q e n f o rc e m e n t a c ti o n w a s a p r e c o n d it i o n t o t h e e x is t e n c e o f a p u b li c n u is a n c e . O n a p p e a l , B N S F a r g u e s t h a t t h e d is t r i c t c o u r t m i s re a d § 2 -6 -1 0 5 in re a c h in g th is c o n c lu s io n . W e a g r e e . Section 2-6-105 states: A . I t s h a ll b e u n la w f u l f o r a n y p e r s o n t o c a u s e p o ll u t i o n o f a n y w aters of the state or to place or cause to be placed any w astes in a l o c a t io n w h e r e t h e y a r e l ik e l y t o c a u s e p o l lu t io n o f a n y a i r , land or w aters of the state. A ny such action is hereby declared to b e a p u b li c n u is a n c e . B . I f th e E x e c u ti v e D i r e c to r f in d s t h a t a n y o f th e a ir , l a n d o r w a te r s o f th e s t a te h a v e b e e n , o r a re b e in g , p o l l u t e d , t h e E x e c u ti v e D i r e c to r s h a ll m a k e a n o r d e r r e q u ir i n g s u c h p o ll u t i o n t o c e a s e w i t h i n a r e a s o n a b le ti m e , o r r e q u ir i n g s u c h m a n n e r o f t r e a tm e n t o r o f d is p o s i t i o n o f th e s e w a g e o r o t h e r p o l l u t i n g m a te r i a l a s m a y i n h i s j u d g m e n t b e n e c e s s a r y t o p r e v e n t f u r t h e r p o l l u t i o n . I t s h a ll b e th e d u ty o f th e p e rs o n t o w h o m s u c h o r d e r i s d i r e c te d to f u ll y c o m p l y w i t h t h e o r d e r o f th e E x e c u ti v e D i re c t o r . O k l a . S t a t. t i t . 2 7 A , § 2 - 6 - 1 0 5 . W e r e v ie w a d is t r i c t c o u r t s s t a tu t o r y i n t e r p r e ta ti o n u n d e r a d e n o v o s t a n d a r d . W a r d v . A l ls t a t e I n s . C o ., 4 5 F .3 d 3 5 3 , 3 5 4 ( 1 0 t h C i r.1 9 9 4 ) . T h e p r i m a r y g o a l o f s t a tu t o r y i n t e r p r e ta ti o n i s t o d e te r m i n e a n d f o l l o w l e g i s l a t i v e i n t e n t . H e a d v . M c C r a c k e n , 1 0 2 P .3 d 6 7 0 , 6 8 0 ( O k la . 2 0 0 4 ) . T o d e te r m i n e le g is l a ti v e in t e n t, w e lo o k a t t h e w h o l e a c t i n l i g h t o f it s g e n e ra l -17- p u r p o s e a n d o b je c ti v e . R o u t v . C r e s c e n t P u b . W o r k s A u t h ., 8 7 8 P . 2 d 1 0 4 5 , 1050 (O kla. 1994). W hen interpreting any statute, w e begin w ith the plain a n d o r d i n a r y m e a n i n g o f t h e l a n g u a g e e m p lo ye d i n t h e t e x t . G e o r g e E . F a i l i n g C o . v . W a t k i n s , 1 4 P .3 d 5 2 , 5 6 ( O k l a . 2 0 0 0 ) . W e c o n c l u d e th a t t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t e r r e d i n h o l d i n g t h a t O D E Q e n f o r c e m e n t a c tio n w a s a p re c o n d itio n to th e e x is te n c e o f a p u b lic n u is a n c e . T o b e g i n w i t h , t h e l a n g u a g e o f O k l a . S t a t . t i t. 2 7 A , § 2 - 6 - 1 0 5 i s u n a m b i g u o u s . N o t h i n g i n t h e p la in l a n g u a g e o f O k l a . S t a t. t i t . 2 7 A , § 2 - 6 1 0 5 r e q u ir e s a n o r d e r b y t h e E x e c u ti v e D i r e c to r o f th e O D E Q b e f o r e a n a c t can be declared a public nuisance. Nothing in subsection B purports to limit t h e s c o p e o f s u b s e c ti o n A s d e f in i t i o n o f th e te r m p u b li c n u is a n c e . S e e C o x v . S t a te e x re l. O k l a . D e p t o f H u m a n S e r v s ., 8 7 P . 3 d 6 0 7 , 6 1 7 ( O k l a . 2004). ( This C ourt does not read exceptions into a statute nor m ay w e i m p o s e r e q u ir e m e n t s n o t m a n d a te d b y t h e L e g i s l a tu r e . ) . I n f a c t , a r e a d in g of subsections A and B indicates subsection B w as not intended to limit subsection A . S u b s e c ti o n A s t a te s , i n p a r t , t h a t [ i] t s h a ll b e u n la w f u l f o r a n y p e r s o n t o c a u s e p o ll u t i o n o f a n y w a te r s o f th e s t a te o r t o p l a c e o r c a u s e to b e p la c e d a n y w a s t e s i n a lo c a ti o n w h e r e th e y a r e l i k e l y t o c a u s e p o l l u ti o n . . . . O k l a . S t a t . t i t . 2 7 A , § 2 - 6 - 1 0 5 ( A ) (e m p h a s is a d d e d ) . W e v i e w s u b s e c t i o n A a s a d e c la r a ti o n o f th e typ e o f c o n d u c t t h a t c o n s t i t u t e s a p u b li c n u is a n c e u n d e r -18- O k l a h o m a l a w , a n d i t i s c le a r th a t th e i n te n t o f s u b s e c t i o n A i s to d e e m a s a p u b l ic n u i s a n c e c o n d u c t th a t e it h e r h a s c a u s e d o r is li k e l y t o c a u s e p o l lu t io n . A c c o r d i n g l y, p o l lu t io n n e e d n o t h a v e a l re a d y o c c u r r e d b e f o r e c o n d u c t lik e ly to c a u s e p o llu tio n c a n b e d e e m e d a p u b lic n u is a n c e . S u b s e c t io n B , o n t h e o t h e r h a n d , d e m o n s t ra t e s t h a t th e E x e c u t iv e D i re c t o r s a u th o r i t y u n d e r t h i s s e c ti o n i s m o r e li m i t e d . I t s t a te s , i n p a r t, t h a t [ i] f th e E x e c u ti v e D i r e c to r f in d s t h a t a n y o f th e a ir , l a n d o r w a te r s o f th e s t a te h a v e b e e n , o r a r e b e in g p o l l u t e d , t h e E x e c u ti v e D i r e c to r s h a ll m a k e a n o r d e r requiring such pollution to cease . . . . O kla. Stat. tit. 27A , § 2-6-105(B ) ( e m p h a s is a d d e d ). T h e f u n c t i o n o f s u b s e c ti o n B , t h e r e f o r e , i s t o d i r e c t t h e E x e c u ti v e D i r e c to r o f O D E Q t o o r d e r a b a te m e n t o f p o ll u t i o n w h e r e it h a s a l r e a d y o c c u rr e d . The district court s reading of subsection B to effectively limit s u b s e c ti o n A w o u l d m e a n th a t t h e p la c e m e n t o f a n y w a s t e s i n a lo c a ti o n w h e r e th e y a r e li k e ly t o c a u s e p o ll u t i o n c o u ld n e v e r b e a p u b li c n u is a n c e b e c a u s e s u b s e c ti o n B r e q u ir e s t h e p o ll u t i o n t o h a v e o c c u r r e d b e f o r e th e E x e c u ti v e D i r e c to r o f th e O D E Q c a n a c t t o a b a te th e n u is a n c e . T h i s r e a d in g c o n tr a d ic ts t h e p la in l a n g u a g e o f O k l a . S t a t. t i t . 2 7 A , § 2 - 6 - 1 0 5 . S e e V illines v. Szczepanksi, 122 P.3d 466, 470 (O kla. 2005) ( It is presumed t h a t t h e la w - m a k in g b o d y h a s e x p r e s s e d it s i n t e n t i n a s t a tu t e s l a n g u a g e a n d t h a t i t i n t e n d e d w h a t it s o e x p re s s e d . ) . -19- F u r t h e r m o r e , t h e d is t r i c t c o u r t s r e a d in g a ls o b e li e s t h e le g is l a ti v e i n t e n t b e h i n d O k l a . S t a t. t it . 2 7 A , § 2 - 6 - 1 0 5 . T h e O k l a h o m a L e g i s la t u r e s i n t e n t t h a t c o n d u c t t h a t c a u s e s o r i s l i k e ly t o c a u s e p o ll u t i o n b e d e c l a r e d a p u b l i c n u is a n c e i s l o n g s t a n d in g , a n d p r e d a te s t h e e n a c tm e n t o f th e p r e s e n t s u b s e c t i o n B . I n f a c t , O k l a . S t a t . t i t. 8 2 , § 9 2 6 ( A ) , f r o m w h i c h O k l a . S t a t . t i t . 2 7 A , § 2 - 6 - 1 0 5 ( A ) w a s d e r i v e d , h a d a lm o s t i d e n ti c a l l a n g u a g e . 2 N o t a b l y, O k l a . S t a t . t i t. 8 2 , § 9 2 6 . 4 d i d n o t c o n t a i n a p a r a l l e l t o O k l a . S t a t . t i t . 2 7 A , § 2 - 6 - 1 0 5 ( B ) . W e a g re e w i t h t h e a m i c i t h a t t o c o n c lu d e , u p o n a d o p t i o n o f § 9 2 6 .4 a n d i t s r e l o c a t i o n t o § 2 - 6 - 1 0 5 , t h a t t h e O k l a h o m a L e g is l a tu r e in t e n d e d to d e p a rt f r o m i t s p r i o r p o s i t i o n , a n d to n o w r e q u ir e a n O D EQ order before conduct could be declared a public nuisance, would call f o r a c l e a re r l in g u is tic s ig n a l th a n m e r e s ile n c e . W e r e a c h a s i m i l a r c o n c lu s i o n w h e n c o n s i d e r i n g t h e p u r p o s e o f th e e n t i r e c o d e . O k l a . S t a t . t i t. 2 7 A , § 2 - 3 - 5 0 6 ( A ) s t a t e s , i n p e r t i n e n t p a r t , th a t : [ i] t i s t h e p u r p o s e o f th i s C o d e to p r o v i d e a d d it i o n a l a n d c u m u la tiv e re m e d ie s to p r e v e n t, a b a te a n d c o n tr o l p o llu tio n . N o t h i n g c o n ta in e d in t h i s C o d e s h a ll b e c o n s t r u e d to a b r i d g e o r a lt e r r i g h t s o f a c t i o n o r r e m e d i e s u n d e r t h e c o m m o n l a w o r statutory law , crim inal or civil; nor shall any provision of this C o d e , o r a n y a c t d o n e b y v i r t u e th e r e o f , b e c o n s t r u e d a s 2 O k l a . S t a t. t it . 8 2 , § 9 2 6 .4 ( A ) ( W e s t 1 9 9 0 ) r e a d : I t s h a ll b e u n la w f u l f o r a n y p e r s o n t o c a u s e p o ll u t i o n a s d e f in e d in S e c t i o n 1 o f th i s a c t o f a n y w a te r s o f th e s t a te o r t o p l a c e o r c a u s e to b e p la c e d a n y w a s te s i n a lo c a ti o n w h e r e t h e y a r e l i k e ly t o c a u s e p o l l u t i o n o f a n y w a te r s o f t h e s t a t e . A n y s u c h a c ti o n i s h e r e b y d e c la r e d to b e a p u b li c n u is a n c e . -20- e s to p p i n g t h e s t a t e , o r a n y m u n i c i p a l it y o r p e r s o n i n t h e e x e r c is e of their rights under the common law to suppress nuisances or to a b a te p o ll u t i o n . N o t h i n g i n t h i s C o d e s h a ll i n a n y w a y i m p a ir o r a f f e c t a p e rs o n s ri g h t to re c o v e r d a m a g e s f o r p o llu tio n . O k l a . S t a t. t i t . 2 7 A , § 2 - 3 - 5 0 6 ( A ) . T o r e q u ir e a n o rd e r o f a b a t e m e n t f r o m t h e E x e c u t i v e D i r e c t o r o f t h e O D E Q a s a p r e c o n d i t io n t o a s s e r t i n g a p u b l i c n u i s a n c e c la im u n d e r O k l a . S t a t. t i t . 2 7 A , § 2 - 6 - 1 0 5 , n o t o n l y u n d e r c u ts t h e a d d it i o n a l a n d c u m u l a ti v e r e m e d i e s th e c o d e i s i n t e n d e d to p r o v i d e , b u t also precludes an action to prevent pollution under this section and w ould i m p a i r o r a f f e c t a p e rs o n s ri g h t to r e c o v e r d a m a g e s f o r p o llu tio n , c o n t r a r y to th e e x p re s s in te n t o f th e L e g is la tu r e . S e e O k la . S ta t. tit. 2 7 A , § 2 - 3 - 5 0 6 ( A ) . T h i s r e s u l t w o u l d v i o l a te th e m a x i m o f s t a tu t o r y c o n s t r u c ti o n that [w ]hen possible, different provisions m ust be construed together to e f f e c t a n h a rm o n i o u s w h o l e . V i l l i n e s , 1 2 2 P . 3 d a t 4 7 1 . B. Judgm ent as a M atter of Law B N S F n e x t c h a l le n g e s th e d i s tr ic t c o u r t s e n t ry o f j u d g m e n t a s a matter of law on its private nuisance and unjust enrichment claims. W e r e v i e w a d i s t r i c t c o u r t s j u d g m e n t a s a m a t t e r o f l a w d e n o v o , a p p lyi n g t h e s a m e l e g a l st a n d a r d s u s e d b y t h e d i s tr ic t c o u r t. K n o w l t o n v . T e l t r u s t P h o n e s , I n c ., 1 8 9 F .3 d 1 1 7 7 , 1 1 8 6 ( 1 0 th C ir . 1 9 9 9 ) . 1 . P e r s o n a l L i a b i l it y -21- B N S F f i r s t a r g u e s t h a t G r a n t, t h e in d iv i d u a l, m a y b e h e ld l i a b le to t h e e x te n t h e w a s r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e m a i n t e n a n c e o f a n u i s a n c e t h a t w a s u n d e r h i s p o s s e s s io n o r c o n tr o l. T h is is a n a c c u r a te s ta te m e n t o f O k la h o m a la w . S e e B r a n c h v . M o b i l O i l C o r p . , 7 8 8 F . S u p p . 5 3 1 , 5 3 3 ( W .D . O k l a . 1 9 9 1 ) ; D u n c a n v . F l a g le r , 1 3 2 P . 2 d 9 3 9 , 9 4 1 ( O k l a . 1 9 4 2 ) . H o w e v e r, w e d is a g r e e t h a t t h e r e a re g e n u in e is s u e s o f m a te r i a l f a c t i n t h e r e c o rd t h a t G r a n t p e r s o n a l l y d ir e c te d , p a rt ic ip a te d in o r c o n tr o lle d th e c o m m is s io n o f a to r t . W h i l e G r a n t s f o r m e r e m p l o ye e , B i l l R o t h e r , s t a t e d t h a t G r a n t p e r s o n a l l y s t o p p e d b y t h e c o n s t r u c ti o n s i t e r e g u la r l y w h i l e th e p r o p e r t y i n q u e s t i o n w a s b e in g c o n v e rt e d to a p ip e ya r d , o n e c a n n o t r e a s o n a b ly i n f e r f r o m t h i s t h a t G r a n t p e r s o n a ll y m a n a g e d t h e c o n s t r u c ti o n , a n d th e r e b y d i r e c te d , s a n c ti o n e d , o r a c ti v e ly p a r t i c ip a te d o r c o o p e ra te d in , a p o s i t i v e ly w r o n g f u l a c t . A d d i ti o n a l ly, w h i le t h e r e c o r d c o n t a in s a n i n v o i c e s i g n e d b y G r a n t f o r a s u b s t a n ti a l a m o u n t o f d ir t t o b e u s e d a s f il l e r d u r i n g t h e c o n v e r s i o n o f th e p r o p e r t y t o a p ip e ya r d , w e c o n c l u d e th a t t h i s c a n n o t r e a s o n a b ly b e v ie w e d a s e v id e n c e o f G r a n t s m a n a g e m e n t o f th e h o w , w h e n , a n d w h e r e o f th e c o n s t r u c t io n . N e v e r t h e l e s s , B N S F s n e x t a r g u m e n t , th a t G r a n t m a y b e h e l d p e r s o n a l l y l i a b l e a s a s u c c e s s i v e o w n e r , i s m o r e c o n v i n c i n g . O k l a . S t a t . t i t. 50, § 5 provides [e]very successive ow ner of property w ho neglects to a b a te a c o n t i n u i n g n u i s a n c e u p o n , o r i n t h e u s e o f s u c h p r o p e r t y, c r e a te d b y -22- a f o r m e r o w n e r , i s li a b l e th e r e f o r in t h e s a m e m a n n e r a s t h e o n e w h o f i r s t c r e a te d it . T h i s s e c ti o n p r o v i d e s f o r l i a b il i t y o f s u c c e s s o r o w n e r s w h o h a v e o r s h o u l d h a v e k n o w l e d g e o f t h e e x i s t e n c e o f t h e n u i s a n c e a n d o f i t s l i a b i l it y t o c a u s e in j u r y. U n i o n T e x a s P e t r o l e u m C o r p . v . J a c k s o n , 9 0 9 P . 2 d 1 3 1 , 1 4 1 ( O k l a . C i v . A p p . 1 9 9 5 ) . D e s p i t e G r a n t s a r g u m e n ts t o t h e c o n tr a r y, t h e O k l a h o m a S u p r e m e C o u r t h e ld l o n g a g o th a t a n in j u r e d la n d o w n e r n e e d n o t request abatem ent from the tortfeasor responsible for a nuisance prior to bringing a nuisance action in instances w here the tortfeasor knew or should h a v e k n o w n o f th e n u is a n c e . S e e C h i c a g o , R .I . & P . R y. C o . v . M o r t o n , 1 5 7 P . 9 1 7 , 9 2 0 (O k la . 1 9 1 6 ). W e conclude that there is sufficient evidence in this record to submit t o a ju r y t h e q u e s t i o n o f w h e th e r G r a n t, a s a n in d i v i d u a l, h a d c o n s t r u c ti v e o r actual know ledge that the TLM on his property constituted a nuisance to B N S F . T h i s e v id e n c e r a n g e s f r o m G r a n t s s t i p u l a ti o n t h a t h e w a s a w a r e o f t h e e x is t e n c e o f T L M o n h i s p r o p e r t y w h e n h e to o k t i t l e to i t , t o e v id e n c e t h a t T L M i n c u r s io n s w e r e o p e n a n d n o t o r i o u s , i n t h a t th e r e i s s w o r n t e s t i m o n y t h a t T L M e m e r g i n g f r o m G r a n t s l a n d p u s h e d d o w n a f e n c e b e t w e e n t h e p r o p e r t i e s in q u e s t i o n a n d c a u s e d a u t il i t y p o l e t o l is t. T h u s , w h i le t h e r e i s n o t s u f f i c i e n t e v i d e n c e i n t h e p r e s e n t r e c o r d t o e s ta b l is h G r a n t s p e r s o n a l l i a b il i t y a s a c o rp o r a te o f f i c e r, t h e r e is s u f f ic ie n t e v id e n c e t o p u t b e f o re a tr i e r o f f a c t t h e q u e s t i o n o f w h e th e r G r a n t w a s o n a c tu a l o r -23- constructive notice that the TLM on his property constituted a nuisance to BNSF. 2. Damages B N S F n e x t c h a lle n g e s t h e d is t r i c t c o u r t s d e te r m i n a ti o n t h a t i t f a il e d t o s u b m i t a t r i a b le i s s u e o n t h e q u e s t i o n o f d a m a g e s . S p e c i f ic a l l y, B N S F d i s p u t e s t h e d is t r i c t c o u r t s h o l d i n g t h a t d a m a g e s f o r a c o n ti n u i n g tem porary nuisance are limited to the diminution in value of the property in q u e s t i o n . H o w e v e r, a s s u m i n g t h a t d i m i n u t i o n i n v a lu e is i n d e e d th e li m i t o n damages recoverable, BN SF next argues that the district court erred in r e q u i r i n g B N S F to c a rr y th e b u r d e n o f p r o v in g th e a m o u n t o f th a t lo s t v a lu e . F i n a ll y, B N S F c o n t e n d s t h a t t h e d is t r i c t c o u r t e r r e d in c o n c lu d i n g B N S F h a d f a il e d to p r o v e th a t i t s d a m a g e s w e r e in c u r r e d w i t h i n t h e a p p li c a b le tw o ye a r l i m i t a ti o n s p e r i o d . a. M easure of Damages First, B N SF asserts that the amount of damages it may recover for n u i s a n c e i s t h e t o t a l o f t h e r e a s o n a b l e c o s t s i t in c u r r e d i n a t t e m p t i n g t o m i n i m iz e th e lo s s w i t h w h i c h it w a s t h r e a te n e d . W e d is a g r e e . D a m a g e o r in j u r y, a s t yp i c a ll y u s e d in n u i s a n c e c a s e s , i s t h e d a m a g e o r i n j u r y r e s u l t in g f r o m t h e n u i s a n c e . P e r m a n e n t d a m a g e s , a s w e l l as temporary damages, may be recovered for the maintenance of a t e m p o r a r y n u i s a n c e . B r i s c o e v . H a r p e r O i l C o ., 7 0 2 P . 2 d 3 3 , 3 6 ( O k l a . -24- 1 9 8 5 ) . I n n u i s a n c e c a s e s , d a m a g e s a r e d e t e r m i n e d b y w h e t h e r th e i n j u r y s u f f e r e d i s p e r m a n e n t o r t e m p o r a r y, r a t h e r th a n w h e t h e r th e c a u s e o f i n j u r y i s p e r m a n e n t o r t e m p o r a r y. I d . A c c o rd i n g l y, d a m a g e s a w a r d e d in a n a c t i o n p r e d ic a te d o n a n u is a n c e t h e o r y m a y i n c lu d e te m p o r a r y a n d p e rm a n e n t i n j u r y t o l a n d . I d . A n i n j u r y i s d e e m e d t e m p o r a r y, a n d n o t p e r m a n e n t , if i t i s r e a s o n a b ly a b a ta b le , t h a t i s , c a p a b l e o f b e i n g c o r r e c te d b y a r e a s o n a b le e x p e n d it u r e o f m o n e y w i t h i n a r e a s o n a b le p e ri o d o f ti m e . M o n e yp e n n e y v . D aw son, 141 P.3d 549, 553 (O kla. 2006). D amages reasonably incapable o f a b a t e m e n t a re p e rm a n e n t. B r i s c o e , 7 0 2 P .2 d a t 3 6 . A s for temporary injury to land, the measure of damages is w elle s t a b li s h e d . S c h n e b e rg e r v . A p a c h e C o r p ., 8 9 0 P . 2 d 8 4 7 , 8 5 2 ( O k l a . 1 9 9 4 ) ( O k l a h o m a c a s e la w f r o m s t a te h o o d to t h e p r e s e n t . . . h a [ s ] i n t e r p r e te d th e p r o p e r m e a s u r e o f d a m a g e s t o b e d im i n u t i o n i n v a lu e . ) . [ T ] h e m e a s u r e o f d a m a g e s i s t h e c o s t o f r e s t o r i n g t h e l a n d t o i t s f o r m e r c o n d i t io n , w i t h c o m p e n s a t i o n f o r l o s s o f u s e o f it , i f th i s a lt o g e th e r i s l e s s t h a n th e diminution in value w ith the injuries left standing. H ouck v. Hold O il C orp., 867 P.2d 451, 460 (O kla. 1993); see also Tenneco O il C o. v. A llen, 515 P.2d 1391, 1395-97 (O kla. 1973) (holding that nuisance damages i n c lu d e c l e a n u p c o s t s i n a d d it i o n t o t e m p o r a r y i n j u r i e s t o l a n d ) . W h e n t h e c o s t o f r e p a i r in g t h e i n j u r y i s g r e a t e r th a n t h e d i m i n u t io n i n t h e l a n d s v a l u e , t h e la tte r i s th e tr u e m e a s u r e o f d a m a g e s . H o u c k , 8 6 7 P .2 d a t 4 6 0 . -25- U n d e r l yi n g t h i s r u l e is t h e p r i n c ip l e o f a v o i d a b le c o n s e q u e n c e s , w h i c h r e q u i r e s p la in tif f s to m itig a te th e ir d a m a g e s . I d . T h e d is t r i c t c o u r t w a s c o r r e c t i n h o l d in g t h a t B N S F c a n o n l y r e c o v e r t h e c o s t s o f r e m o v i n g t h e T L M i f i t s r e s t o r a ti o n c o s t s d o n o t e x c e e d th e d i m i n i s h e d v a lu e o f th e la n d . B N S F , i n e f f e c t, i s r e q u e s t i n g t h a t w e c a r v e o u t a n e x c e p tio n a n d h o ld t h a t w h e r e r e s t o r a ti o n c o s t s h a v e b e e n e x p e n d e d prior to the institution of suit, the measure of damages should be the full c o s t o f r e s t o r a ti o n . B N S F c i t e s n o a u th o r it y f r o m t h i s c ir c u it o r f r o m O klahoma case law w hich supports its view . Instead, it attem pts to d i s t i n g u i s h e x is t i n g p r e c e d e n t b y a r g u i n g t h a t t h e c a s e s r e li e d u p o n b y t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t , S c h n e b e rg e r , 8 9 0 P . 2 d a t 8 5 2 a n d P e e v yh o u s e v . G a r l a n d C oal & M ining C o., 382 P.2d 109, 113 (O kla. 1963), hold that estim ated r e p a ir c o s t s a r e n o t r e c o v e r a b le if th e y a r e g ro s s l y d i s p r o p o r t i o n a te to t h e diminution in value of a plaintiff s land, because any contrary ruling w ould o v e r c o m p e n s a t e th e p la in t i f f . B N S F a r g u e s f u r t h e r t h a t b o t h S c h n e b e rg e r a n d P e e v yh o u s e in v o l v e d p la in t i f f s s e e k in g r e c o v e r y o f e s t i m a t e d c o s t s f o r w o r k t h e y h a d n o t p e r f o r m e d , a n d w h i c h th e c o u rt f o u n d w o u l d l i k e ly n e v e r b e p e r f o r m e d . W h i l e B N S F s a r g u m e n t s a r e n o t e n t i r e l y w it h o u t m e r i t , w e s e e n o n e e d to d e p a rt f r o m t h e w e ll - e s t a b li s h e d O k l a h o m a l a w t h a t w h e n t h e c o s t o f r e p a i r in g t h e i n j u r y i s g r e a t e r th a n t h e d i m i n u t io n i n t h e l a n d s v a lu e , t h e la tt e r i s t h e tr u e m e a s u r e o f d a m a g e s . H o u c k , 8 6 7 P . 2 d a t 4 6 0 ; -26- C f . S c h n e b e rg e r , 8 9 0 P . 2 d a t 8 5 2 ( W h a te v e r t h e r a ti o n a le , t h e e s s e n c e o f . . . P e e v yh o u s e . . . h a s b e e n c o n s i s t e n t l y a d h e r e d t o i n c a s e s g i v i n g r i s e t o t e m p o r a r y a n d p e r m a n e n t in j u r i e s t o p r o p e r t y. ) . b. Burden of Proof N e x t, B N S F a r g u e s t h a t e v e n if th e d im i n u t i o n i n m a r k e t v a lu e is t h e u p p e r l i m i t f o r t e m p o r a r y d a m a g e t o p r o p e r t y, t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t i m p r o p e r l y a l l o c a t e d th e b u rd e n o f p ro o f to B N S F . W e a g r e e . W hile it is true a plaintiff m ust prove all elem ents of a claim , i n c lu d i n g d a m a g e s , W i l c o x O i l C o . v . W a lt e r s , 2 8 4 P . 2 d 7 2 6 , 7 3 0 ( O k l a . 1 9 5 5 ) , i t i s e q u a ll y t r u e th a t i n a p p lyi n g t h e d im i n u t i o n i n v a lu e r u l e , n u m e r o u s c o u r t s h a v e e x p r e s s l y h e ld t h a t a n y l i m i t o n r e c o v e r a b le d a m a g e s is a matter that must be pleaded by the defendant, as it grow s out of the rule o f a v o id a b le c o n s e q u e n c e s . S e e , e .g ., M c F a r l a n d v . B r i e r , 7 6 9 A .2 d 6 0 5 , 6 1 0 ( R . I . 2 0 0 1 ) ; D a v is v . F i r s t I n t e r s t a te B a n k o f Id a h o , 7 6 5 P . 2 d 6 8 0 , 6 8 1 ( I d a h o 1 9 8 8 ) . T h i s f o ll o w s f r o m t h e r e c o g n it i o n t h a t t h e d o c tr i n e o f a v o id a b le c o n s e q u e n c e s i s a n a f f ir m a ti v e d e f e n s e . S e e M c F a r l a n d , 7 6 9 A . 2 d a t 6 1 0 ; D a v is , 7 6 5 P .2 d a t 6 8 1 . O k la h o m a c a s e la w s u g g e s ts a s m u c h . I t i s w e ll - e s t a b lis h e d u n d e r O k l a h o m a l a w t h a t w i t h r e g a rd t o s i m i l a r i s s u e s i n t o r t a n d c o n tr a c t a c ti o n s , t h e b u r d e n o f p r o v i n g t h a t d a m a g e s s h o u l d h a v e b e e n re d u c e d o r m i n i m i z e d is o n t h e d e f e n d a n t. S e e C i t i e s S e r v . C o . v . G u lf O i l C o r p ., 9 8 0 P .2 d 1 1 6 , 1 3 4 ( O k la . 1 9 9 9 ) ; S a c k e t t v . R o s e , 1 5 4 P . -27- 1177, 1181 (O kla. 1916) ( The burden of proving circumstances in m i t i g a ti o n o f d a m a g e s i s u p o n t h e p a rty g u i l t y o f th e to r t i o u s a c t o r b r e a c h o f c o n tr a c t. ) . W e c o n c l u d e th a t O k l a h o m a c a s e la w r e q u ir e s a d e f e n d a n t t o s h o u l d e r t h e b u r d e n o f e s t a b li s h i n g d i m i n u t i o n i n v a lu e to s e t t h e u p p e r l i m i t o f r e c o v e ra b le d a m a g e s f o r a te m p o r a r y in ju r y to la n d . c. Statute of Lim itations B N S F n e x t a r g u e s t h a t t h e d is t r i c t c o u r t e r r e d in h o l d i n g t h a t i t f a il e d t o p r o v e it s d a m a g e s w e r e in c u r r e d w i t h i n t h e a p p li c a b le li m i t a ti o n s p e r i o d a s r e g a r d s i ts s t a t e la w c l a i m s . O n t h i s is s u e , w e c o n c l u d e p a r t o f B N S F s damages w ere incurred w ithin the applicable period, but some w ere not. U n d e r O k l a h o m a l a w , t h e d a m a g e s r e c o v e r a b le f o r a c o n ti n u i n g t e m p o r a r y n u i s a n c e a ll e g e d h e r e b y B N S F a r e li m i t e d to i n j u r i e s i n c u r r e d w i t h i n th e tw o ye a rs i m m e d ia te ly p r e c e d i n g t h e f il i n g o f th e l a w s u i t . B r a n c h , 7 8 8 F . S u p p . a t 5 3 6 ; C i t y o f B e th a n y v . M u n i c ip a l Securities Co., 274 P.2d 363, 367 (O kla. 1954); H aenchen v. Sand Products C o . , 6 2 6 P .2 d 3 3 2 , 3 3 4 ( O k l a . A p p . 1 9 8 1 ) . B N S F f i l e d it s l a w s u i t i n M a r c h o f 2 0 0 3 . T h u s , B N S F c a n r e c o v e r d a m a g e s f o r i n j u r i e s s u s t a in e d b e tw e e n M a r c h o f 2 0 0 1 a n d M a rc h o f 2 0 0 3 . T h e s t a tu t e o f li m i t a ti o n s f o r t h e f il i n g o f a n u is a n c e a c ti o n b e g in s w h e n th e in j u r y i s c o m p l e te . I d . ( c it i n g E l k C i t y v . R i c e , 2 8 6 P . 2 d 2 7 5 , 2 7 8 - 7 9 ( O k l a . 1 9 5 5 ) ) . F o r a c o n ti n u i n g t e m p o r a r y n u i s a n c e , s u c h a s t h e -28- n u i s a n c e a ll e g e d b y B N S F , t h e in j u r y i s c o m p l e te u p o n e a c h a ll e g e d i n v a s i o n , w h i c h g iv e s r i s e o v e r a n d o v e r t o [ n e w ] c a u s e s o f a c t i o n f o r d a m a g e s s u s t a in e d w i t h i n t h e li m i t a ti o n s p e r i o d i m m e d ia te ly p r i o r t o s u i t . B ranch, 788 F. Supp. at 536; see also H aenchen, 626 P.2d at 334. Injuries w h i c h o c c u r o u t s i d e th e tw o - ye a r l o o k - b a c k p e r i o d a r e o u ts i d e o f th e s t a tu t e o f li m i t a ti o n s . F i s c h e r v . A t l a n ti c R i c h f ie ld C o ., 7 7 4 F . S u p p . 6 1 6 , 619 (W .D. Okla. 1989). Here, the last alleged invasion of TLM onto B N S F s p r o p e r t y o c c u rr e d in J u n e o r J u l y o f 2 0 0 1 , i m m e d ia te ly p r i o r t o t h e e r e c t i o n o f th e b e rm b y B N S F . A s n o t e d a b o v e , o n e a s p e c t o f d a m a g e s t h e v i c ti m o f a t e m p o r a r y n u i s a n c e c a n re c o v e r is t h e c o s t o f r e s t o r i n g t h e la n d to i t s f o r m e r c o n d it i o n . . . i f th i s a lt o g e th e r i s l e s s t h a n th e d im i n u t i o n i n v a lu e w i t h t h e i n j u r i e s l e f t s t a n d in g . H o u c k , 8 6 7 P . 2 d a t 4 6 0 ; s e e a l s o H a e n c h e n , 6 2 6 P . 2 d a t 3 3 6 n .2 ( h o l d i n g t h a t th e m e a s u r e o f d a m a g e s [ i s ] th e v a l u e o f l o s t o r d a m a g e d c r o p s o r t h e v a l u e o f l o s t r e n t a l f o r t h e p e r i o d t w o ye a r s p r i o r t o s u i t b e in g f il e d a n d th e r e a f t e r u n t i l t r i a l, p l u s t h e p e rm a n e n t d a m a g e t o t h e land (before and after) or the cost of removing the obstruction, whichever is l e s s ) . H e r e , B N S F e n t e r e d i n t o e v i d e n c e a s p r e a d s h e e t i te m i z i n g i t s c o s t s o f r e m e d i a ti o n . T h i s i n c lu d e d b o th t h e c o s t o f b u il d i n g t h e b e rm t o s t o p t h e a l l e g e d m ig r a t i o n o f T L M , t h e c o s t o f m o v i n g a g a s p i p e t o b u i l d t h e b e r m , a n d t h e c o s t o f re m o v in g a s u b s ta n tia l a m o u n t o f T L M f r o m its p r o p e r t y. -29- B e c a u s e t h e c o s t o f a b a t in g a n u i s a n c e i s o n e f a c e t o f d a m a g e s f o r a c o n t i n u i n g t e m p o r a r y n u i s a n c e , B N S F m e t i ts b u r d e n o f s e t t in g f o r t h d a m a g e s o f it s c o s t o f r e s t o r a ti o n w i t h i n t h e tw o - ye a r l i m i t a ti o n s p e r i o d . N o n e t h e l e s s , G r a n t i s c o r r e c t t o p o i n t o u t t h a t B N S F i s n o t e n t i tl e d t o t h e c o s t s o f r e m o v i n g a ll T L M o n i t s l a n d s i m p l y b y p e r f o r m i n g t h a t r e m o v a l w i t h i n a tw o - ye a r p e r i o d p r i o r t o f il i n g s u i t , r e g a rd l e s s o f w h e th e r s u c h a c l e a n -u p a d d re s s e s i n j u r i e s t h a t o c c u rr e d o u ts i d e th e li m i t a ti o n s p e r i o d . I n o t h e r w o r d s , B N S F c a n o n l y r e c o v e r r e m o v a l c o s ts f o r t h e a p p r o x i m a te ly f o u r m o n t h s o f T L M m i g r a ti o n b e tw e e n M a r c h a n d J u l y o f 2 0 0 1 , b e c a u s e th a t i s t h e o n ly t i m e p e ri o d f a ll i n g w i t h i n t h e tw o - ye a r s t a tu t e o f li m i t a ti o n s . T o p e r m i t B N S F t o r e c o v e r f o r t h e r e m o v a l o f a ll t h e T L M o n i t s p r o p e r t y w o u l d , i n e f f e c t, n e g a te th e s t a tu t e o f li m i t a ti o n s , a s B N S F w o u ld th e n b e a b le to re c o v e r f o r d e c a d e s o f T L M m ig r a tio n . H o w e v e r, b e c a u s e O k l a h o m a l a w a ll o w s a p la in t i f f to r e c o v e r i t s c o s t s o f abatem ent in a tem porary nuisance action, the district court erred in h o l d i n g t h a t B N S F f a ile d to s e t f o r t h m e a s u r a b le e v id e n c e o f d a m a g e s . S e e , e .g . , T e n n e c o O il C o , 5 1 5 P . 2 d a t 1 3 9 5 - 9 7 ( h o l d i n g t h a t n u i s a n c e d a m a g e s i n c l u d e c l e a n u p c o s t s in a d d i ti o n t o t e m p o r a r y i n j u r i e s t o l a n d ) . I n s h o r t , w h i l e th e d is t r i c t c o u r t i d e n ti f ie d th e c o rr e c t m e a s u r e o f d a m a g e s , i t e r r e d in p l a c in g th e b u r d e n o n B N S F t o p r o v e th e li m i t o f d a m a g e s r e c o v e r a b l e . T h e d i s tr ic t c o u r t f u r th e r e r r e d i n d i s m i s s in g B N S F s -30- r e m a i n i n g c l a i m s a s f a ll i n g o u t s id e o f t h e s t a t u t e o f l i m i t a t i o n s . W e r e v e rs e th e d is t r i c t c o u r t s d i s m i s s a l o f B N S F s p r i v a te n u is a n c e c la im a n d w e r e m a n d f o r f u r th e r p r o c e e d i n g s . 3. U njust Enrichm ent T h e d is t r i c t c o u r t d i s m i s s e d B N S F s u n j u s t e n r i c h m e n t c la im , h o l d i n g t h a t i t h a d f a i l e d to e s t a b li s h a n a f f ir m a ti v e d u ty o n t h e p a rt o f G r a n t w h i c h h e w o u l d h a v e b e e n r e q u ir e d to p e r f o r m b u t f o r B N S F s p e r f o r m a n c e o f th e sam e.3 B N SF argues that our reversal of the district court s rulings on its public or private nuisance claim s w ould necessitate a reinstatem ent of its u n j u s t e n r i c h m e n t c la im . W e a g re e . I n N .C . C o r f f P s h i p , L t d . v . O x y U S A , I n c ., 9 2 9 P . 2 d 2 8 8 , 2 9 5 ( O k l a . Civ. App. 1996), the court defined unjust enrichment: [A ] right of recovery under the doctrine of unjust enrichment is essentially equitable, its basis being that in a given situation it i s c o n tr a r y t o e q u it y a n d g o o d c o n s c ie n c e f o r o n e to r e ta in a b e n e f it w h ic h h a s c o m e to h im a t th e e x p e n s e o f a n o th e r . . . . [It] arises not only w here an expenditure by one person adds to t h e p r o p e r t y o f a n o th e r , b u t a ls o w h e r e th e e x p e n d i t u r e s a v e s the other from expense or loss. ( q u o t i n g A m .J u r .2 d R e s t i t u t i o n a n d I m p li e d C o n t r a c t s § 3 ( 1 9 7 3 ) ) . T o r e c o v e r f o r u n j u s t e n r i c h m e n t th e r e m u s t b e e n ri c h m e n t t o a n o th e r c o u p le d 3 W e r e je c t a s u n t e n a b le G r a n t s a r g u m e n t t h a t t h i s i s s u e is s u b j e c t t o a c le a rl y e r r o n e o u s s t a n d a rd o f r e v ie w b e c a u s e th e d is t r i c t c o u r t , i n d i s m i s s i n g t h i s c la im p u r s u a n t t o R u le 5 0 o f th e F e d e ra l R u l e s o f C i v i l P r o c e d u re , w a s somehow making sub rosa findings of fact under Rule 52(b). -31- w i t h a r e s u l t i n g i n j u s t i c e . T e e l v . P u b l i c S e r v . C o . o f O k l a ., 7 6 7 P . 2 d 3 9 1 , 3 9 8 ( O k la .1 9 8 5 ) ( s u p e r s e d e d b y s t a t u te o n o th e r g r o u n d s ) . H e r e , B N S F e s s e n ti a ll y a ll e g e s a th e o r y o f n e g a t i v e u n ju s t e n r i c h m e n t b y a ll e g in g t h a t t h e r e m e d i a ti o n i t u n d e r to o k s a v e d G r a n t a n e x p e n s e it w o u l d o t h e r w i s e h a v e h a d t o i n c u r . B e c a u s e w e r e v e rs e th e d is t r i c t c o u r t a n d r e in s t a te a ll o f B N S F s c l a i m s , i t m a y n o w b e a b l e t o p r o v e i t s u n j u s t e n r i c h m e n t t h e o r y. G r a n t, i n t u r n , a r g u e s t h a t b e c a u s e B N S F a l r e a d y h a s l e g a l c la im s t h a t w i l l c o v e r t h e r e l i e f s o u g h t , it s a d d i t io n a l c l a i m f o r u n j u s t e n r i c h m e n t i s prohibited. How ever, Oklahoma courts have squarely rejected this a r g u m e n t . N .C . C o r f f P s h i p , L t d , 9 2 9 P .2 d a t 2 9 5 ( O k l a h o m a p r o c e d u r e c le a rl y p e r m i ts p l e a d in g a lt e r n a ti v e r e m e d i e s , j u s t a s i t a ll o w s a lt e r n a ti v e t h e o r i e s o f r e c o v e r y, a s l o n g a s p l a in t if f s a r e n o t g i v e n d o u b le r e c o v e r y f o r t h e s a m e i n j u r y. ) . T h e r e f o r e , w h i l e B N S F i s n o t e n t i tl e d t o a d o u b l e r e c o v e r y f o r t h e s a m e i n j u r i e s , i t i s e n ti t l e d to p u r s u e it s u n j u s t e n r i c h m e n t c la im a s a n a lt e r n a ti v e c la im . W e r e v e rs e th e d is t r i c t c o u r t s d i s m i s s a l o f B N S F s u n j u s t e n r i c h m e n t c la im a n d r e m a n d t h i s i s s u e f o r f u r t h e r proceedings. C . E v id e n ti a r y R u l i n g s BN SF also argues that the district court erred in excluding certain t e s t i m o n i a l a n d d o c u m e n t a r y e v i d e n c e . S p e c i f i c a l ly, t h e d i s tr ic t c o u r t g r a n t e d , w i th o u t e x p l a n a t io n , G r a n t s m o t io n t o e x c l u d e B r o w n l e e s e x p e r t -32- o p i n i o n t h a t t h e T L M B N S F h a d r e m o v e d w a s T L M t h a t h a d m i g r a te d f r o m G r a n t s p r o p e r t y. T h e d is t r i c t c o u r t a ls o e x c lu d e d B r o w n l e e s t e s t i m o n y r e g a r d i n g T L M h e h a d p e rs o n a lly v ie w e d o n th e p r o p e r t ie s in q u e s tio n . BN SF w as also prohibited from presenting photographs it asserts illustrate T L M m i g r a tio n . 1 . E x c lu s i o n o f B r o w n l e e s T e s t i m o n y A s f o r th e d i s tr ic t c o u r t s d e c i s i o n t o e x c l u d e B r o w n l e e s e x p e r t opinion, we note that when [f]aced w ith a proffer of expert scientific t e s t i m o n y . . . t h e tr i a l j u d g e m u s t d e te r m i n e a t t h e o u ts e t . . . w h e th e r t h e e x p e r t i s p r o p o s i n g t o t e s t i f y t o ( 1 ) s c i e n t if i c k n o w l e d g e t h a t (2 ) w i l l a s s is t t h e t r i e r o f f a c t to u n d e rs ta n d o r d e te r m in e a f a c t in is s u e . D a u b e r t v . M e r r e l l D o w P h a r m a c e u t ic a l s , I n c ., 5 0 9 U .S . 5 7 9 , 5 9 2 ( 1 9 9 3 ) . I n p e r f o r m i n g t h i s g a te k e e p e r r o l e , t h e ju d g e m u s t a s s e s s t h e r e a s o n i n g a n d m e t h o d o l o g y u n d e r l yi n g t h e e x p e r t s o p i n i o n , t h e n d e t e r m i n e w h e t h e r i t i s s c ie n ti f ic a ll y v a li d a n d a p p li c a b le to a p a rt i c u la r s e t o f f a c ts . S e e id . a t 5 9 2 - 9 3 . W e r e v i e w d e n o v o t h e is s u e o f w h e th e r t h e d is t r i c t c o u rt a p p li e d t h e le g a l t e s t p r o p e r l y, G o e b e l v . D e n v e r a n d R i o G r a n d e W e s t e r n R .R ., 2 1 5 F.3d 1083, 1087 (10th Cir. 2000), and review the district court s decision to a d m i t o r d e n y t h e te s t i m o n y u n d e r a n a b u s e o f d is c r e ti o n s t a n d a rd , G e n e ra l E l e c . C o . v . J o in e r, 5 2 2 U .S . 1 3 6 , 1 4 3 ( 1 9 9 7 ) . The trial court has the discretion to determine how to perform its -33- g a te k e e p i n g f u n c ti o n . S e e K u m h o T i r e C o ., v . C a r m i c h a e l , 5 2 6 U .S . 1 3 7 , 1 5 2 ( 1 9 9 9 ) . G e n e r a l l y, t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t p e r f o r m s t h i s f u n c t i o n a t a D a u b e rt h e a ri n g , a lt h o u g h s u c h a h e a r i n g i s n o t s p e c if ic a ll y r e q u ir e d . S e e H yn e s v . E n e rg y W e s t, I n c ., 2 1 1 F .3 d 1 1 9 3 , 1 2 0 3 - 0 4 ( 1 0 th C ir . 2 0 0 0 ) . A lthough the district court has discretion in the manner in w hich it c o n d u c t s a D a u b e r t a n a l ys i s , i n o r d e r t o p r o v i d e f o r m e a n i n g f u l a p p e l l a t e review the district court must create a sufficiently developed record in o r d e r t o a ll o w a d e te r m i n a ti o n o f w h e th e r t h e d is t r i c t c o u r t p r o p e r l y a p p li e d t h e r e l e v a n t la w . D o d g e v . C o t te r C o r p . , 3 2 8 F .3 d 1 2 1 2 , 1 2 2 3 ( 1 0 t h C i r. 2 0 0 3 ) ( q u o t a ti o n s o m i t t e d ) . A b s e n t s p e c if ic f in d i n g s o r d i s c u s s i o n o n t h e r e c o r d , it is i m p o s s i b l e t o d e t e r m i n e o n a p p e a l w h e t h e r th e d i s tr ic t c o u r t c a re f u ll y a n d m e t i c u lo u s l y r e v ie w [ e d ] t h e p r o f f e r e d s c ie n ti f ic e v id e n c e o r in s t e a d m a d e a n o f f - th e - c u f f d e c i s io n t o a d m i t o r d e n y t h e e x p e r t t e s t i m o n y. G o e b e l, 2 1 5 F . 3 d a t 1 0 8 8 ( q u o t i n g U n i t e d S t a te s v . C a ll , 1 2 9 F . 3 d 1 4 0 2 , 1 4 0 5 ( 1 0 t h C i r. 1 9 9 7 ) ) . H ere, the district court failed to make any findings on the record in s u p p o r t o f it s e x c lu s i o n o f B r o w n l e e s e x p e rt t e s t i m o n y. H o w e v e r, G r a n t argues that a review of the record of the two-day D aubert hearing reveals f la w s i n B r o w n l e e s m e th o d o l o g y a n d e x p e r t o p i n i o n t h a t a r e s o p a te n t a n d o b v i o u s t h a t w e m a y h a v e a s u f f ic ie n t r e c o rd u p o n w h i c h to r e v ie w t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t s d e c is i o n t o e x c lu d e B r o w n l e e s o p i n i o n t e s t i m o n y r e g a rd i n g -34- t h e m i g r a ti o n o f t h e T L M . 4 W e d is a g r e e . W h a t G r a n t i s e s s e n ti a ll y a s k i n g u s t o d o i s t o i n f e r t h a t t h e d is t r i c t c o u r t p r o p e r l y p e r f o r m e d its g a te k e e p i n g f u n c ti o n b a s e d o n th e f e w s t a te m e n t s i t m a d e a n d q u e s t i o n s i t a s k e d d u r i n g t h e D a u b e rt h e a ri n g . T h is w e a re u n w i l l i n g t o d o . I n t h e a b s e n c e o f f in d i n g s b y t h e d is t r ic t c o u r t t o s u p p o r t i t s r u l i n g t o e x c lu d e th i s e v id e n c e , w e cannot determine w hether it applied the relevant law and properly p e r f o r m e d it s g a te k e e p i n g f u n c ti o n . A c c o rd i n g l y, w e r e v e rs e th e d is t r i c t c o u r t s r u li n g o n t h i s i s s u e a n d r e m a n d f o r f u r th e r p r o c e e d i n g s . A s r e g a rd s t h e d is t r i c t c o u r t s e x c lu s i o n o f B r o w n l e e s t e s t i m o n y concerning his personal observation of the TLM on the properties in question, we affirm. Although the exclusion of Brow nlee s lay testimony is l i s t e d a m o n g t h e is s u e s B N S F s e e k s t o a p p e a l , i t h a s f a il e d to p r o v i d e a r g u m e n ts o r a u th o r i t i e s i n s u p p o r t o f th i s i s s u e . W e w i l l n o t r e v ie w a n issue in the absence of reasoned arguments advanced by the appellant as to t h e g r o u n d s f o r i t s a p p e a l . A n t o n i o v . S yg m a N e tw o r k , I n c ., 4 5 8 F . 3 d 1 1 7 7 , 1 1 8 4 ( 1 0 t h C ir . 2 0 0 6 ) . T h e r e f o r e , a b s e n t r e a s o n e d a r g u m e n t a t i o n , w e a f f i r m t h e d is t r i c t c o u r t o n t h i s i s s u e . 2. Photographs 4 B r o w n l e e s c r e d e n ti a ls w e r e s t i p u la te d to a n d a re n o t a t i s s u e . -35- A s f o r t h e d is t r i c t c o u r t s d e c i s i o n t o e x c l u d e p h o to g r a p h s B N S F s o u g h t t o o f f e r a s e v id e n c e , w e a re u n a b le to a d d r e s s t h i s i s s u e o n th e r e c o rd p r o v i d e d b e c a u s e th e c o p ie s o f th e p h o to g r a p h s i n q u e s t i o n a r e o f s u c h p o o r q u a li t y t h e y a r e im p o s s i b l e to s c r u t i n i z e in a n y m e a n in g f u l m a n n e r . B e c a u s e w e c a n n o t r e v i e w th i s i s s u e o n t h e r e c o r d b e f o r e u s , w e a f f i r m t h e d i s tr ic t c o u r t. S e e S c o t t v . H e r n , 2 1 6 F .3 d 8 9 7 , 9 1 2 ( 1 0 t h C i r. 2 0 0 0 ) ( a f f i r m i n g d i s t r i c t c o u r t , w h e r e th e e v id e n ti a r y r e c o rd b e f o r e th e c o u r t i s i n s u f f ic ie n t t o p e r m i t a n a s s e s s m e n t o f a n a p p e ll a n t s c la im s o f error). D . Spoliation A f te r r e c e i v i n g e x te n s i v e b r i e f in g , a n d a f t e r h o l d i n g a tw o d a y h e a ri n g , t h e d is t r i c t c o u r t e n te r e d a n o rd e r , w i t h o u t a n a lys i s , d e n yi n g G r a n t s m o tio n f o r s p o lia tio n s a n c tio n s . G r a n t a p p e a l s t h i s r u l i n g i n t h e e v e n t t h e d is t r i c t c o u r t s j u d g m e n ts a p p e a l e d b y B N S F a r e r e v e rs e d , a r g u i n g t h a t t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t e r r e d b o t h f a c t u a l l y a n d l e g a l l y i n d e n yi n g i t s m o t i o n f o r s p o lia tio n s a n c tio n s . A s a th r e s h o l d m a tt e r , B N S F a r g u e s t h a t t h i s c r o s s - a p p e a l i s i m p r o p e r b e c a u s e c ro s s - a p p e a l s a r e to b e d is m i s s e d w h e r e th e y m e r e ly p r e s e n t a n a lt e r n a te g r o u n d s f o r a f f i r m a n c e , b u t d o n o t a s k t h a t t h e ju d g m e n t b e a lt e r e d in a n y w a y. S e e , e .g ., J a r v i s v . N o b e l/ S ys c o F o o d S e r v . C o ., 9 8 5 F . 2 d 1 4 1 9 , 1 4 2 6 n . 7 ( 1 0 t h C i r . 1 9 9 3 ) (h o l d i n g t h a t d is m i s s a l o f c r o s s -36- a p p e a l i s p r o p e r w h e r e a p a r t y p r e s e n ts a lt e r n a te g r o u n d s t o a f f i r m , b u t does not ask[] that the judgm ent itself be altered ). N onetheless, w e c o n c lu d e th a t t h e s p o l i a ti o n i s s u e is n o t a n a lt e r n a te g r o u n d s f o r a f f i r m i n g t h e j u d g m e n t o n t h e m e r i t s . R a t h e r , r e s o l u t i o n o f t h i s i s s u e c o u l d r e s u l t in a p o s s i b l e d is m i s s a l o f B N S F s a c ti o n a s a s a n c ti o n , a n d f o r r e a s o n s h a v in g nothing to do with the actual merits of BN SF s claim s. W e therefore turn to t h e s p o l i a tio n is s u e its e lf . W e r e v ie w a d is t r i c t c o u r t s d e n ia l o f a m o t i o n f o r s p o l i a ti o n s a n c t i o n s f o r a n a b u s e o f d is c re tio n . 1 0 3 I n v e s to r s I , L .P . v . S q u a r e D C o ., 4 7 0 F . 3 d 9 8 5 , 9 8 9 ( 1 0 t h C i r . 2 0 0 6 ) . I n d o i n g s o , w e a c c e p t t h e d is t r i c t c o u r t s f a c t u a l f in d i n g s u n l e s s t h e y a r e c le a rl y e r r o n e o u s . A l l s t a te I n s . C o . v . H a m i l t o n B e a c h /P ro c to r S ile x , 4 7 3 F .3 d 4 5 0 , 4 5 6 ( 2 n d C ir . 2 0 0 7 ) . A s p o l i a ti o n s a n c ti o n i s p r o p e r w h e r e ( 1 ) a p a rt y h a s a d u ty t o p r e s e r v e e v id e n c e b e c a u s e it k n e w , o r s h o u l d h a v e k n o w n , t h a t l i t i g a ti o n w a s i m m i n e n t, a n d ( 2 ) t h e a d v e r s e p a rt y w a s p r e ju d i c e d b y t h e d e s t r u c ti o n o f t h e e v i d e n c e . 1 0 3 In v e s to rs I, L .P ., 4 7 0 F .3 d a t 9 8 9 . G r a n t s a r g u m e n ts a r e f o u rf o ld . F i r s t , G r a n t a r g u e s t h a t t h e d is t r i c t c o u r t e r r e d a s a m a t t e r o f la w b y c o n c lu d i n g t h a t t h e s p o l i a ti o n d o c tr i n e d o e s n o t a p p ly in c a s e s in v o lv in g th e d e s tr u c tio n o f a n a lle g e d n u is a n c e . S e c o n d , G r a n t a r g u e s t h a t t h e d is t r i c t c o u r t e r r e d in s o f a r a s i t c o n c lu d e d t h a t a f in d i n g o f b a d f a it h w a s a n e c e s s a r y p r e r e q u is i t e to a f in d i n g t h a t -37- s p o l i a ti o n o c c u rr e d . T h i r d , G r a n t c la im s t h a t t h e d is t r i c t c o u r t c le a rl y e r r e d b y f a il i n g t o f in d t h a t B N S F b r e a c h e d a d u ty t o p r e s e r v e e v id e n c e g a th e r e d i n a n t ic i p a t io n o f l i t ig a t io n . F i n a l l y, G r a n t c la i m s t h a t th e d i s tr ic t c o u r t c le a rl y e r r e d b y f a il i n g t o f in d t h a t t h i s a ll e g e d d e s t r u c ti o n o f e v id e n c e w a s p r e j u d i c i a l to h is d e f e n s e . U p o n r e v i e w o f t h e r e c o r d , a n d u p o n c o n s id e r a t i o n o f t h e p a r t i e s b r i e f s , w e c o n c l u d e th a t n o r e a s o n a b le f in d e r o f f a c t c o u ld d e te r m i n e th a t G r a n t w a s m e a n in g f u ll y p r e ju d i c e d b y B N S F s r e m o v a l a n d d e s t r u c ti o n o f p o r t i o n s o f th e T L M o n i t s p r o p e r t y. 5 T h e g r a v a m e n o f G r a n t s a r g u m e n t r e g a r d i n g p r e j u d i c e i s th a t h e c a n n o t d e f e n d t h i s la w s u i t b e c a u s e B N S F s clean-up altered the topography and slope of the land, and prevented him f r o m h a v in g t h e a ll e g e d T L M m i g r a ti o n m e a s u r e d s c ie n ti f ic a ll y. 6 W e r e je c t t h i s c la im . B N S F g e n e r a te d e x te n s i v e d o c u m e n t a ti o n o f th e c o n d it i o n o f t h e la n d b e f o r e a n d d u ri n g r e m e d i a ti o n , a n d th e f a c tu a l d i s p u t e r e g a rd i n g a n y c h a n g e i n e le v a ti o n o f th e r e m e d i a ti o n s i t e a m o u n t s t o , a t m o s t , o n e a n d a q u a rt e r i n c h e s . I n l i g h t o f th i s , a n d a b s e n t m e a n in g f u l e v id e n c e t h a t G r a n t h a s b e e n a c t u a l l y, r a t h e r t h a n m e r e l y t h e o r e t i c a l l y, p r e j u d i c e d , w e 5 W e t h e r e f o re d e c li n e t o a d d r e s s t h e r e m a i n d e r o f G r a n t s a r g u m e n ts o n this issue. 6 W e a l s o f in d u n c o n v in c in g G r a n t s a r g u m e n t t h a t i t w a s p r e ju d i c e d b e c a u s e it s a p p r a i s a l e x p e r t w a s u n a b l e t o o b s e r v e th e T L M s i te , d u e t o B N S F s r e m e d i a t io n , a n d e s ta b lis h h o w m u c h B N S F s la n d w a s a lle g e d ly d e v a l u e d . -38- a f f i r m t h e d is tr ic t c o u rt s d e n ia l o f G r a n t s m o tio n f o r s p o lia tio n s a n c tio n s . III I n s u m , w e c o n c l u d e th a t t h e d is t r i c t c o u r t e r r e d in d i s m i s s i n g B N S F s R C R A , p u b l ic n u i s a n c e , a n d a b a t e m e n t c la i m s a t t h e s u m m a r y judgment stage. W e further conclude that the district court erred in e n te r i n g j u d g m e n t a s a m a t t e r o f la w a s t o B N S F s p r i v a te n u is a n c e a n d u n j u s t e n r i c h m e n t c la im s . I n l i g h t o f th e s e h o ld i n g s , w e v a c a te th e d is t r i c t c o u r t s o r d e r a w a r d i n g G r a n t a tt o r n e y f e e s . W e a ls o a f f i r m t h e d is t r i c t c o u r t s d e n i a l o f G r a n t s m o t io n f o r s p o l ia t i o n s a n c t io n s . A c c o rd i n g l y, w e R E V E R S E t h e d is t r i c t c o u r t s r u l i n g s i n 0 4 - 5 1 8 2 and 04-5190 and REM A N D for further proceedings. A s for case number 05-5137, we A FFIRM the district court. -39-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
