|
|
 |
|
Viewing report
|
|
|
|
The Instant Impact of U.S. v. Albert Inv. Co. (10th Cir. Nov. 10, 2009) on Rights of Nonsettling PRPs to Intervene under CERCLA in Consent Decrees
ExecSense, Dec 2009, Minutes: 60
“The Instant Impact of U.S. v. Albert Inv. Co. (10th Cir. Nov. 10, 2009) on Rights of Nonsettling PRPs to Intervene under CERCLA in Consent Decrees” is a time efficient way for environmental lawyers to be in-the-know on the most up to date facts and ramifications of this case and take proactive steps on behalf of current and prospective clients it could impact the most. Take the 60 minutes to view this webinar (on your computer, mobile phone, iPod or printed out) to make sure you have answers ready to key questions you are sure to be asked on the immediate ramifications of this decision by colleagues and clients, as a nonsettling PRP may now be able to intervene as a right under CERCLA due to a settlement reached between other PRPs and the government.
Upon ordering, we will email you a link to download the webinar for viewing on your computer, mobile media device (iPod/iPhone, Blackberry), or printed out. The downloaded files will include the PowerPoint presentation, audio narration and jpeg images of the slides (for watching on your mobile media device).
The webinar is led by an expert on CERCLA and consent decree proceedings, Albert Cohen, and focuses on:
- Everything you need to know in 60 minutes about the impact of the Tenth Circuit’s ruling on the rights of nonsettling PRPs to intervene under CERCLA in consent decrees
- Detailed discussion of the split in authority among U.S. courts over whether a nonsettling PRP’s contribution right under CERCLA is a legally sufficient interest for intervention in a consent decree with other settling defendants
- Perspective on how the Tenth Circuit’s decision may affect future CERCLA consent decree proceedings and the incentive for PRPs to settle with the government if all PRPs have not signed on
- The 10 questions being asked the most by environmental lawyers and their clients with respect to how this decision will impact them and what proactive steps they should be taking
- Case studies of what other lawyers are doing for their clients, now and in the future, based on this ruling
Praise for ExecSense Webinars:
- Was first on the scene with an in depth overview of this game changing decision.” – Howard Grubbs, Practice Group Leader, Womble Carlyle
- If it's up to the minute information that you need, go with ExecSense.” – Christopher J. Dow, Hunsucker Goodstein & Nelson
- Thorough, informative and interesting...an efficient, effective means of gaining in depth insight...” - Greg Nowak, Partner, Pepper Hamilton
Customers who bought this item also bought
Understanding the Instant Impact of United States v. APW North America (9th Cir. June 2, 2010) on Intervention in CERCLA Cases (ExecSense Webinars)
The Instant Impact of City of Emeryville v. Sherwin Williams Company (9th Cir. Sept. 15, 2010) on Contribution Protection Under CERCLA - What is the Value and is There a Way to Protect Settling Parties Against Future Suits
The Instant Impact of Niagara Mohawk Power Corp. v. Chevron U.S.A., Inc. (2nd Cir. Feb. 24, 2010) on Environmental Lawyers & Recovering Contribution Costs under CERCLA after Settling with State Environmental Authorities
The Instant Impact of Papudesu v. Medical Malpractice Joint Underwriting Association of Rhode Island on Insurance Lawyers & The Right to Settle Language in Professional Liability Policies
The Instant Impact of Cal. Dept. of Toxic Substances Control v. Hearthside Residential Corp. (9th Cir. July 22, 2010) on the Date When “Owner and Operator” Status Is Determined Under CERCLA
The Instant Impact of Starr v. Sony BMG Entertainment (2nd Cir. Jan. 13, 2010) on Antitrust Lawyers and the Clarification of Post-Twombly Pleading Standards for Sherman Act Claims
The Instant Impact of Narouz v. Charter Comm., LLC (9th Cir. Jan. 15, 2010) on Litigators and the Effect of Settling with the Class Representative on the Appealability of Class Certification Denial
The Instant Impact of Rederford v. U.S. Airways (1st Cir. Dec. 14, 2009) on Employment Lawyers and the Discharge of Employment Discrimination “Claims” in Bankruptcy
The Instant Impact of Medmarc Cas. Ins. Co. v. Avent America, Inc. (7th Cir. July 15, 2010) on Insurance Lawyers and Insurers' Duty to Defend No-Injury Product Liability Lawsuits Under Standard CGL Policies
The Instant Impact of North Carolina v. Tennessee Valley Authority (4th Cir. July 26, 2010) on the Use of Public Nuisance Suits to Regulate Air Emissions
|
|
|
|
