Celesq® Programs

Who Should Pay For Environmental Harm—Spiller or Product Manufacturer?

Expired
Program Number
1805E
Program Date
2008-04-10
CLE Credits
2

Increasingly, environmental litigation brought by State AGs, local district attorneys and private plaintiffs aims to bypass the traditional defendant—the party that released harmful contaminants into soil, water or air resources. Instead, relying on theories derived from the doctrines of public nuisance and product liability, such litigation frequently targets the manufacturer, distributor or handler of products that, when released negligently or unlawfully by third parties, produce environmental harm. In this program, from the Celesq® Environmental Law series, our presenters focus on the legal and factual theories that underlie such product-based claims, the risks or exposures that they present to defendants, and strategies to counter lawsuits based on them. Among the topics to be covered: • In what areas have product-based lawsuits been filed, and with what results; • What legal theories can be used to target defendants not connected to releases of the contaminant into the environment; • What theories of collective liability are being asserted to name all industry participants without defendant-by-defendant proof of product identification; • What strategies have proven effective in responding to product-based lawsuits.

Available in States

  • Arizona
  • California
  • Colorado Eligible
  • Florida
  • Georgia
  • Missouri
  • New York
  • Texas Self Study
  • New Jersey Eligible

Program Categories

  • California Participatory MCLE Programs
  • Corporate and Commercial Law
  • Environmental Law
  • In-House Counsel
  • Litigation & Litigation Skills
  • Negligence, Malpractice & Personal Injury
  • New York Accredited
  • Regulatory and Administrative Law

PROGRAM CREDITS

  • 1.0 General CLE credit : 1 Credit
  • 1.0 General CLE credit : 1 Credit