Resolving Superfund Liability and Protecting PRP Interests: Recent Developments and Best Practices in Settling and Preserving CERCLA Claims

Recent Developments and Best Practices in Settling and Preserving CERCLA Claims

Recording of a 90-minute CLE video webinar with Q&A


Conducted on Tuesday, January 12, 2021

Recorded event now available

or call 1-800-926-7926
Program Materials

This CLE webinar will provide counsel advising parties in a contaminated site cleanup with guidance on both protecting the interests of settling potentially responsible parties (PRPs) and, on the other hand, protecting the contribution interests of non-settling PRPs.

Description

Most Superfund matters are resolved by settlements--settlements with regulators and settlements among private parties. But not all settlements are created equal; not all provide the protection-release that parties seek or preserve the contribution and cost recovery rights that releasors intend to retain.

Recent cases such as New Jersey DEP v. American Thermoplastics Corporation, Arconic v. APC Investment, ASARCO LLC v. Union Pac. R.R. Co. and the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Atlantic Richfield Co. v. Christian, all provide lessons and guidance for practitioners. This program will evaluate the risks and rewards of CERCLA settlements and how to craft them--or attack them--to best protect client interests.

Listen as our authoritative panel of environmental law attorneys examines recent PRP intervention trends and developments and offers best practices for CERCLA settlements, including settlement incentives for PRPs and when a PRP should settle.

READ MORE

Outline

  1. Administrative orders and agreements and consent decrees: Settling with the government
  2. Allocation agreements and cash-outs: Private party settlements
  3. Intervention and other challenges to settlements
  4. Recent CERCLA decisions involving settlements
  5. Best practices for protecting client Interests

Benefits

The panel will review these and other key issues:

  • How can a settling PRP minimize the risk of future claims?
  • What can a non-settling party do to minimize the risk of disproportionate liability?
  • Under what circumstances should a PRP seek to participate in a settlement?
  • What strategies should PRPs employ to protect their contribution interests in settlements to which they are not a party?

Faculty

Cohen, Albert
Albert M. Cohen

Partner
Loeb & Loeb

Mr. Cohen's practice includes complex environmental cases and transactions involving soil and groundwater...  |  Read More

Kirn, Jillian
Jillian C. Kirn

Shareholder
Greenberg Traurig

Ms. Kirn focuses her practice on environmental and energy matters. She represents clients in litigation in state and...  |  Read More

Schiller, Suzanne
Shoshana Suzanne Ilene Schiller

Partner
Manko Gold Katcher & Fox

Ms. Schiller is a partner in the litigation group of the Philadelphia-area environmental and energy law firm of Manko...  |  Read More

Other Formats
— Anytime, Anywhere

Strafford will process CLE credit for one person on each recording. All formats include program handouts. To find out which recorded format will provide the best CLE option, select your state:

CLE On-Demand Video

48 hours after event

$297

Download

48 hours after event

$297