- Comprehensive Environmental Response (1)
- Contingency fee (1)
- Contingency fees (1)
- Economic harm (1)
- Compensation and Liability Act (1)
- Public natural resource damage (1)
- CERCLA (1)
- Special counsel (1)
- Hazardous spills (1)
- Outsourcing (1)
- Global warming (1)
- Pure economic loss rule (1)
- Environmental special counsel (1)
- Economic loss (1)
- Compensation (1)
- Tort recovery (1)
- Damages (1)
- Environmental accountability (1)
- Attorney fees (1)
- Private parties (1)
- Environmental law (1)
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Symposium: Environmental Accountability In An Age Of Consequences: Foreword, Julie E. Steiner
The five articles in this Symposium issue each take a different approach to addressing environmental accountability. There is unequivocal evidence that the climate system is warming, caused mainly by the measurable increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions. The Symposium authors include Denis Binder, Susan Stark, Julie E. Steiner, Chris Erchull, Laura Fisher, and Daniel DePasquale. These Authors challenge all to think broadly about utilization of different accountability mechanisms to ensure more efficient environmental outcomes.
Interim Payments And Economic Damages To Compensate Private-Party Victims Of Hazardous Releases, Julie E. Steiner
There is a gap in tort recovery for many hazardous release victims. Hazardous spill victims receive different damage compensation based solely upon the type of hazardous substance released, with oil spill victims benefitting from a number of statutory damage recovery mechanisms that victims of other type of hazardous substance releases do not receive. Specifically, those injured by oil spills receive interim payments and recover for their economic loss. Yet, many victims injured by non-oil hazardous spills will incur economic harm but will not receive compensation because of a prohibition on recovery for economic loss absent accompanying physical injury or private ...
Should "Substitute" Private Attorneys General Enforce Public Environmental Actions? Balancing The Costs And Benefits Of The Contingency Fee Environmental Special Counsel Arrangement, Julie E. Steiner
There is developing phenomenon of quasi-privatized environmental enforcement occurring on behalf and in the name of governments by entrepreneurial attorneys who substitute in place of the public enforcers and derive professional payment from a contingent fee withdrawn from the public’s environmental damage award. This Article addresses the question of whether governments should permit private attorneys to handle these “substitute environmental special counsel” enforcement arrangements. In so doing, the Article weighs the arrangement’s costs and benefits from the standpoint of whether it maximizes the deterrence and restorative compensation goals of environmental enforcement.
Governments are often the only entities with ...
The Illegality Of Contingency-Fee Arrangements When Prosecuting Public Natural Resource Damage Claims And The Need For Legislative Reform, Julie E. Steiner
Private attorneys are entering into contingency-fee based special counsel agreements with states, territories and tribes, to bring public natural resource damage (NRD) claims. Under this agreement, special counsel brings a NRD action on behalf of the public and fronts the litigation costs, but deducts a percentage of the public's damage recovery to pay the attorney's contingency fee; the remainder goes into a fund to be allocated by the government's NRD trustee. Because NRD claims implicate gargantuan damage awards, the legality of depleting such a damage award by a substantial percentage to pay an attorney's fee is ...