Law Firm News

---

Law Firm News

Firm Name

News Title

News

News Date

25383 matches |  9857-9863 displayed

1  1406 1407 1408 1409 1410  3627

---

Hunton & Williams, LLP

Hunton & Williams Represents Banco Santander in Second Significant Acquisition of Assets from Bank of America
Hunton & Williams energy attorneys advocated for their clients' interests when Congress passed the first Clean Air Act of 1970, were involved in the creation of the Environmental Protection Agency that same year, and advised on the agency’s Acid Rain Program in 1990.

Most recently, the firm worked on the Energy Policy Act of 2005. It is now defending one of five utilities companies in the country’s first “nuisance suit” in the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. In the case, eight states and three land trusts claim that the companies' carbon dioxide emissions contribute to the "nuisance" of global climate change.

“There are two points about our practice, number one is that we have a broad history in being on point in big energy cases, and number two is that we are doing this in a multi- disciplinary and collaborative way,” said Pat McCormick, a partner who specializes in regulated industries and government relations. “The energy practice here is so central to our firm.”

Hunton & Williams started as an energy firm in 1901 in Richmond, Va., representing the state’s first power company, McCormick said. It began by counseling traditional energy providers, such as electrical, oil and natural gas companies. In a continuing effort to stay ahead of the curve, it has also come to focus on newer energy sources, such as biodiesel and wind power.

“Green is here to stay, so it’s important for us to be involved in those cases,” said Mark Wasem, a partner in Dallas. It now has about 100 attorneys worldwide who focus on energy cases, according to Wasem. The energy group is divided into three broad areas— environment and regulation, project finance and regulatory industry groups—which increasingly overlap.

As energy companies continue to resist climate control legislation that would introduce emissions limits, the environment and regulation group deals with many of today’s hot topics, said Allison Wood, a partner who specializes in environmental cases.

Wood is representing the Utility Air Regulatory Group in a case in the Washington, D.C. Circuit Court in which Massachusetts asks the EPA to impose emissions on power companies. Hunton & Williams is supporting the agency in its position that it does not have that authority, Wood said.

“Because the U.S. has said it’s not going to impose mandatory emission limits, a lot of people are complaining about that, and it’s become an interesting climate now as the issues has turned to the courts,” Wood said. The second subgroup in the firm’s energy practice assists clients brokering mergers, acquisitions and buyouts around the world, from the U.S. to Europe to Africa, said Wasem, a member of the project finance team.

For instance, Wasem recently represented Progress Energy when it sold its oil, gas and pipeline subsidiaries to Exco Resources Inc. for $1 billion, he said. Other clients have included Duke Energy Corp., TXU Energy Corp. and EnCana Corp., a Canadian energy firm.

The regulatory industry area deals largely with the Federal Energy Regulation Commission, often in cases involving the agency’s enforcement of market rules and conduct standards, said McCormick, a former assistant deputy general counsel at FERC.

“We are doing a lot on the electrical side, but we represent almost all the entities regulated by the Commission, which is somewhat rare,” he said. In this area, the firm is quite active in advocating on behalf of clients’ interests, he said. “There really is a place for advocacy here. Looking back at the Energy Policy Act, our clients were very, very active in that. We were engaged for clients in all of those questions.”

The energy practice will continue to remain a focus for Hunton & Williams, McCormick said, adding that it has been named as one of the firm’s three highest priorities. The practice now plans to further coordinate and unite the three areas, Wasem said. “The fun and fascinating thing about energy now is that it’s impossible to name a hotter industry, in terms of international attention,” he said. “What’s so fascinating now is rate of change, the way it continues to accelerate, because there’s an increasing world demand for energy. Energy is focus of the world now.

02-23-2007

---

Hinshaw & Culbertson, L.L.P.

Kenneth H. Denberg Joins Hinshaw's Chicago Office
Kenneth H. Denberg, formerly of counsel at Michael Best & Friedrich, has joined the Chicago office of Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP. Mr. Denberg will bring his extensive experience as a real estate and business lawyer to the firm.

Mr. Denberg has handled the representation and formation of closely held corporations, limited partnerships and limited liability corporations. He is experienced in handling secured real estate lending transactions, joint venture negotiations and other estate matters as they pertain to business and commercial ventures. His real estate experience includes the representation of owners and operators in purchase and sale transactions as well as multi-state dealings for both new developers and established companies.

Mr. Denberg’s real estate law practice has included the disposition of a number of regional shopping centers and office properties for JMB Realty and the oversight of several parcels of land in the Milwaukee Avenue business corridor in Chicago on behalf of developers. On the latter project, he worked closely with the local city Alderman and neighborhood group committee to develop a plan for the project that included additional residential and commercial units and off-street parking.

Mr. Denberg has also represented hotels, financial institutions, insurance entities and other corporate institutions in matters relating to real estate acquisition and other complex business transactions.

Mr. Denberg began his legal career as an associate at Block & Solomon. He was a solo practitioner from 1965 to 1970 before starting his own firm, Bloom & Denberg. Mr. Denberg later became a partner in the law firm of Schwartz and Freeman before the firm merged with Michael Best.

Mr. Denberg earned his bachelor’s degree from the University of Illinois in 1956. He later received his J.D. from DePaul University College of Law.

Mr. Denberg is the author “Equitable Subrogation,” which was published in the Chicago Daily Law Bulletin.

02-23-2007

---

Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer

Freshfields advises China's Huiyuan Juice on its debut on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange
International law firm Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer has advised on the initial public offering (IPO) of China Huiyuan Juice Group Limited ("Huiyuan Juice"), the leading fruit and vegetable juice producers in China, on its listing on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange which completed today. It sold 400 million shares or 26 per cent of its share capital. Total proceeds from the IPO were US$307m (HK$2.4bn) and will exceed US$350m should the 15 per cent over-allotment option be exercised in full. The retail portion of the global offering was more than 900 times over-subscribed.

Freshfields acted as Hong Kong and US counsel to UBS, the underwriters on the IPO.

Huiyuan Juice mainly produces fruit and vegetable juice and has 10 production facilities located in Beijing, Henan, Shanghai, Sichuan, Jiangxi, Hubei, Shangdong, Helongjian and Shaanxi as at 30 September 2006, with 88 production lines and designated production capacity of approximately 1.46 million tons.

The Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer team was led by Beijing-based partner Chris Wong and Hong Kong-based U.S. partner Tim Steinert. Chris commented "We are very pleased to have worked on the Huiyuan Juice IPO; but, more importantly, as a demonstration of the depth of our China practice, separate teams also represented Danone Asia and Warburg Pincus on their pre-IPO investments in Huiyuan Juice. The China consumer sector is very hot at the moment and this will be the first of a number of significant deals in this sector this year."

Partner Chris Wong was assisted by a team from Beijing and Hong Kong which included Antony Dapiran, Lisa Fang, Nicole Lew and Ian Yang. U.S. partner Tim Steinert was assisted by US securities associates Lan Jie and Jean Wu.
Notes for editors

Over the past 12 months in Hong Kong, we have advised on 10 IPOs raising over US$40bn. Through a network of seven offices in Asia, its lawyers practise international law and, where permitted, local law. Currently in Asia, there are 21 partners and more than 180 lawyers, supported by 170 staff.

The firm's China business group is respected as one of the largest, most experienced China teams of any international law firm. A number of members of the group have over 20 years experience in handling China-related advisory and transactional work across a broad range of industries. With more than 50 specialists based in Hong Kong, Beijing, Shanghai, Europe and the US, it is the firm's largest specialist group.

Freshfields' China business group partners are acknowledged leaders in Chinese law as well as in their respective fields of specialisation, bringing a sound knowledge and leadership base to the group.

Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer is a leading international law firm providing a comprehensive worldwide service to national and multinational corporations, financial institutions and governments.

02-23-2007

---

Foster Pepper PLLC

Court Of Appeals Holds City To Strict Standard In Justifying Its Fees For Processing Land Use And Building Permits
This week Division II of the Court of Appeals published a significant decision for both local governments and applicants for land use and building permits. In Home Builders Association of Kitsap County v. City of Bainbridge Island (issued February 21, 2007), the Court interpreted RCW 82.02.020 to limit the elements of fees that local governments are authorized to charge for processing permits. The decision, in effect, prohibits the common practice of including general municipal overhead in permit application fees.

The Home Builders Association challenged an increase in building permit fees as a result of the City’s adoption of a resolution “Relating to the imposition of a surcharge on building permit fees and plan review charges for the purpose of partially funding an affordable housing trust fund.” The challenge was through a class action lawsuit on behalf of everyone who paid building permit fees in the City after passage of this resolution, arguing that the increased fees violate RCW 82.02.020, which prohibits the imposition of fees with certain exceptions. One of these exceptions allows “. . . reasonable fees . . . to cover the cost to the city . . . of processing applications, inspecting and reviewing plans, or preparing detailed statements required by chapter 43.21C RCW [SEPA environmental impact statements].”

The City’s fees included allocations for such municipal overhead as the cost of ownership of city hall and certain legal fees incurred by the City. The City presented evidence that such allocation of overhead costs to its permitting fees complies with guidelines for cost allocation and accounting by government agencies. The City also demonstrated, on the basis of such accounting methods, that its costs to process permits exceeded the amount of fees collected, and that the difference was paid from the Current Expense Fund. By raising its permit fees, the City was decreasing the amount of money that had to be transferred from the Current Expense Fund to support the permit processing system and thereby increasing the amount of money in the Current Expense Fund that could be transferred to its Affordable Housing Trust Fund.

The trial court imposed the burden of proof on the challengers of the fees and concluded that the City’s method was reasonable. The Court of Appeals reversed and remanded for a new trial, holding that the burden was on the City (1) to demonstrate that its fees fell within the legislative exceptions to the general prohibition on fees in RCW 82.02.020, and (2) to demonstrate that such fees were “reasonable”:

"We reject the City’s and the trial court’s expansion of RCW 82.02.020’s exception beyond the costs of processing applications, inspecting and reviewing plans, or preparing SEPA statements to include a portion of all costs allowed by accounting and cost allocation guidelines for government agencies. . . ."

"Thus, the trial court erred when it reached its decision on the reasonableness of the City’s permit fees based on general accounting and cost allocation principles and the City’s costs of regulation, instead of focusing on evidence of costs the legislature specifically allowed in RCW 82.02.020."

The Court’s interpretation of RCW 82.02.020 imposes significant limitations on local permitting fees.

02-23-2007

---

Curtis, Mallet-Prevost, Colt & Mosle, LLP

Curtis Counsel Lizabeth L. Burrell was mentioned in the March 5, 2007 issue of Holland & Knight's newsletter the Maritime Spotlight and in the February 20, 2007 issue of Maritime Advocate Online
Curtis counsel Lizabeth L. Burrell was mentioned in the March 5, 2007 issue of Holland & Knight's newsletter the Maritime Spotlight and in the February 20, 2007 issue of Maritime Advocate Online. Ms. Burrell is president of the Martime Law Association and will be accepting an award on its behalf during a reception on March 28, 2007 where The American Merchant Museum Foundation at King’s Point will pay tribute to the US Maritime Law Association.

02-23-2007

---

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

J. David Stewart Appointed Chair of the Governmental Affairs Committee of the Birmingham Regional Chamber of Commerce
Bradley Arant Rose & White LLP partner, J. David Stewart, was appointed to Chair the Governmental Affairs Committee of the Birmingham Regional Chamber of Commerce. The Governmental Affairs Committee lobbies for the Chamber’s state and federal legislative agendas, working both in Montgomery and Washington, to ensure funding and positioning. The by-laws of the Chamber state that the general purpose of the Chamber shall be “to foster, promote, advance and improve the civic, industrial, agricultural and general business conditions of the Metropolitan Statistical Area.

02-23-2007

---

Weil, Gotshal & Manges, LLP

Weil Represents Florida Rock in its $4.6 Billion Sale to Vulcan Materials
Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP, the international law firm, advised Florida Rock Industries, Inc. (NYSE: FRK), a leading producer of construction aggregates, cement, concrete and concrete products in the Southeast and Mid-Atlantic states, in connection with the proposed acquisition of Florida Rock by Vulcan Materials Company (NYSE: VMC) in a transaction valued at approximately US $4.6 billion.

The transaction, anticipated to close in mid-year 2007, is subject to the approval of a majority of Florida Rock shareholders, regulatory approvals and customary closing conditions. Florida Rock shareholders will own approximately 12% of the combined company.

The acquisition of Florida Rock will expand Vulcan Material’s presence in high-growth markets in Florida and other Southeast and Mid-Atlantic states. Upon completion of the transaction, Florida Rock’s President and CEO John Baker will join Vulcan Material’s board of directors, and Florida Rock’s Vice President, Tom Baker, will become President of Vulcan Material’s new Florida Rock Division headquartered in Jacksonville, FL.

02-23-2007

---

25383 matches |  9857-9863 displayed

1  1406 1407 1408 1409 1410  3627