Compliance Perspectives: The Antitrust Division’s Office of Decree Enforcement
Volatile Times in Vapor Intrusion Regulation: A Legal and Technical Update
Investment Management Roundtable Discussion – Regulatory and Enforcement Update
Podcast - Risk Management: Impact of Revised FCPA Policy on International Risk Management Programs
Podcast - Risk Management: Revised FCPA Corporate Enforcement Policy
Day 16 of One Month to More Effective Continuous Improvement-Voluntary Monitoring
Day 7 of One Month to Better Investigations and Report-How Investigations Inform Remediation
Day 22 of One Month to Better Compliance Through HR-10 Questions to Better Operationalize Compliance
FCPA Compliance and Ethics Report-Episode 31-the FCPA Year in Review, Corporate Enforcement Actions
Lessons Learned from the Parker Drilling DPA and Ralph Lauren NPA
On December 31, 2019, the First District Illinois Appellate Court issued its decision in Owners Insurance Company v. Precision Painting & Decorating Corporation, clarifying what does and does not constitute “property damage”...more
In Pitzer College v. Indian Harbor Insurance Company, the California Supreme Court resolved two previously open questions in insurance law: (1) it concluded that the notice-prejudice rule is a fundamental public policy of...more
Pitzer College v. Indian Harbor Insurance Company, — P.3d –, 2019 WL 4065521 (2019); California Supreme Court, Case No. S239510 (Aug. 29, 2019). On certified questions by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, the California...more
Although California courts generally enforce an insurance policy’s choice of law provision, a long-recognized exception is when the other state’s law conflicts with California’s fundamental public policy. See, e.g. Nedlloyd...more
On August 29, 2019, in Pitzer College v. Indian Harbor Insurance Company, 2019 Cal. LEXIS 6240, the California Supreme Court held that, in the insurance context, the common law “notice-prejudice” rule is a “fundamental public...more
The U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon (“Court”) addressed a request for declaratory judgment by plaintiff landowners concerning future remedial action costs related to a petroleum release. See Roger Goldingay, v....more
The Holding - In Farmers Ins. Exchange v. The Honorable David Udall, 2018 WL 2931906 (June 12, 2018), the Arizona Court of Appeals accepted special action jurisdiction to hold that Insureds validly assigned post-loss...more
On August 25, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, in an unpublished opinion, affirmed the lower court’s ruling that the cost to remediate environmental contamination at a ski resort was subject to a contractual...more
In 2011, Top’s Personnel entered into a reinsurance agreement with Applied Underwriters Captive Risk Assurance Company (“AUCRA”), and several years later executed a promissory note (“the Note”) in favor of a related entity,...more
In State of California v. Continental Ins. Co. (No. E064518; filed 9/29/17), a California appeals court ruled that after Continental was ultimately held to pay its policy limits for remediation of the Stringfellow hazardous...more