An agricultural chemical distributor, B&B, began operations on a piece of land owned by the company in Arvin, California, and later expanded operations onto an adjacent parcel of land owned by two railroads. Among the hazardous chemicals B&B used in its operations and spilled on the ground was a pesticide that B&B purchased from Shell Oil. The spilled chemicals ultimately contaminated the land. After an examination of the site, the EPA ordered a cleanup and spent $8 million. It then sued Shell and the railroads to recover the costs. The district court and court of appeals found the defendant railroads and Shell Oil Company liable for the costs as potentially responsible parties. The railroads and Shell appealed to the Supreme Court. How do you think the high court ultimately ruled? Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway v. United States, 129 S. Ct. 1870 (2009).