Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Rhode Island Win Is Just a Battle in the Public Nuisance War To Come
The recent decision of the Supreme Court of Rhode Island in State v. Lead Indus. Ass'n, 898 A.2d. 1234, 1235 (R.I. 2006), was widely perceived by the American business community as a veritable life saver. The court reversed the trial court's judgment that lead pigment producers should be held liable for the potentially billions of dollars required to remove lead-based paint from hundreds of thousands of residences throughout the state. More broadly, the decision seemed to defuse the ominous potential for a new generation of cases based on “public nuisance” arguments exponentially increasing the liability of businesses in many industries.
However, while the court's decision was an important one, it also may give corporate counsel a false sense of security. It is unlikely that law of public nuisance will return anytime soon to the lowly status it held less than 50 years ago when a Michigan appellate court referred to it as “the great grab bag, the dust bin, of the law.” The state tobacco settlements, resting on public nuisance and similar claims and totaling more than $300 billion, still shine brightly for mass products plaintiffs' attorneys. The Rhode Island litigation provided them with important experience and taught them how to try such claims to jury verdicts. So the question facing corporate counsel is what public nuisance threats remain after the Rhode Island decision.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
How AI Has Affected PR
When we consider how the use of AI affects legal PR and communications, we have to look at it as an industrywide global phenomenon. A recent online conference provided an overview of the latest AI trends in public relations, and specifically, the impact of AI on communications. Here are some of the key points and takeaways from several of the speakers, who provided current best practices, tips, concerns and case studies.
Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar Investigations
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
The DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance Programs
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.