|
|
 |
|
Viewing report
|
|
|
|
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
ExecSense, Oct 2010, Minutes: 60
“The Instant Impact of City of Emeryville v. Sherwin Williams Company (9th Cir. Sept. 15, 2010) on Contribution Protection Under CERCLA” is a time efficient way 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, iPad, Kindle 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, clients and other professionals with whom you discuss the case, as claims by parties who had not been included in the original federal action or who had not received notice of the settlement will not be precluded even where the original action was settled pursuant to CERCLA, so long as the settlement involves neither the United States nor a state.
Upon ordering, ExecSense will email you a link to download the webinar files for viewing on your computer, mobile phone, iPod, iPad, Kindle 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). Take advantage of your next commute, flight, business trip, lunch, or free hour in your schedule to view this webinar.
The webinar is led by an expert on the ramifications of this case and contribution protection under CERCLA, Albert Cohen (Partner, Loeb & Loeb LLP), and focuses on:
- Everything you need to know in 60 minutes about the impact of the Ninth Circuit’s decision on the value of contribution protection under CERCLA and how to protect settling parties against future suits
- Perspective on the impact of the Ninth Circuit’s decision on the finality of CERCLA settlements when neither the United States nor a state is a party, the manner in which future courts interpret Section 113(f)(2) of CERCLA and what settling parties must demonstrate to benefit from the broad contribution protection authorized by the statute, what facts will trigger a federal court’s authority to provide contribution protection, and how negotiation of CERCLA settlements may be affected by this ruling
- 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 environmental lawyers are doing for their clients, now and in the future, based on this ruling
Praise for ExecSense Webinars:
'ExecSense Webinars are an enhanced and effective way to immediately understand new legal trends or decisions that impact your practice.' - Robert Orozco, Partner, Meyers Nave
“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
Customers who bought this item also bought
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
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 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 GSI Commerce Solutions Inc. v. BabyCenter LLC (2nd Cir. Aug. 18, 2010) on the Duty of Loyalty and Representation of Parties Adverse to a Firm Client's Affiliate/Subsidiary
The Instant Impact of Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc. v. Tabari (9th Cir. July 8, 2010) on the Nominative Fair Use Doctrine and Domain Names
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 Chloe v. Queen Bee of Beverly Hills, LLC (2nd Cir. Aug. 5, 2010) on Personal Jurisdiction and Future Trademark Infringement Litigation Against Internet Counterfeiters
The Instant Impact of Hatmaker v. Memorial Med. Ctr. on the Level of Protection Applicable to an Employee's "Participation" in a Pre-EEOC Internal Harassment Investigation for Purposes of Title VII's Anti-Retaliation Section
What Labor & Employment Lawyers Need to Know About Ames v. Home Depot (7th Cir. Jan. 6, 2011)
|
|
|
|
