Law Firm News

---

Law Firm News

Firm Name

News Title

News

News Date

25383 matches |  10760-10766 displayed

1  1536 1537 1538 1539 1540  3627

---

Graham and Dunn

Graham & Dunn Welcomes New Attorney--Judith A. Endejan
The law firm of Graham & Dunn is pleased to announce that Judith A. Edejan has rejoined the firm as a shareholder and a member of the Communications Team. Judy was previously with Graham & Dunn from 2001-2005.

Judy’s background is a unique blend of private practice, and in-house experience with companies such as Fisher Communications and GTE Corporation (now Verizon). She has significant experience counseling clients on legal matters central to their businesses such as commercial contracts and employment issues, as well as broad experience litigating communications issues before state and federal courts and administrative agencies. Judy received her J.D. for the University of Wisconsin-Madison in 1979.

02-05-2007

---

Graham and Dunn

Graham & Dunn Announces Two New Shareholders--Susan M. Johnson and Steven A. Miller
The law firm of Graham & Dunn is pleased to announce that Susan M. Johnson and Steven A. Miller have been elected the newest shareholders of the firm.

Susan Johnson leads Graham & Dunn’s Beverage Group. She represents alcoholic beverage manufacturers, breweries, wineries, restaurants and hotels in liquor licensing, distribution, production and regulatory matters. She received her J.D. from the University of Oregon School of Law in 1995.

Steven Miller is a member of Graham & Dunn’s Financial Services Team. He represents banks and other financial institutions in all aspects of their litigation, including matters involving lender liability, deposit and investment accounts, creditors' rights, employment disputes, and trust litigation. Steve received his J.D. from the University of Washington in 2000.

02-05-2007

---

Hatch & Parent, LC

Supreme Court Strikes Down New Development EIR Based on Uncertain Water Supply
The California Supreme Court entered the fray of water supply availability for specific plans enacted for real estate developments. The Court’s decision in the case of Vineyard Area Citizens for Responsible Growth, Inc. v. City of Rancho Cordova is the first Supreme Court decision following adoption of SB 610 (Costa) and 221 (Kuehl) that considers the sufficiency
of water supply analysis in an environmental impact report (EIR) under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Even though SB 610 and 221 were not directly at issue in this case that did not address water supply issues for an individual development, the Court set forth several principles under which future and existing developments at the community and specific plan levels will be judged for adequacy of their proposed water supply.

The case involved the adequacy of a water supply analysis contained in an EIR for community and specific plan areas in Sacramento County. Because at full build out, the development would have been served by water supplies to be developed in the future, the Court declared that the “principal disputed issue is how firmly future water supplies for a proposed project must be identified or, to put the question in reverse, what level of uncertainty regarding the availability of water supplies can be tolerated in an EIR for a land use plan.” While the Court upheld the adequacy of the EIR’s evaluation of the near-term groundwater supply for the proposed project, the Court concluded the EIR had failed to demonstrate that a long-term water supply was likely to be available to serve the project. As such, the Court reversed the Court of Appeal’s decision upholding the EIR and remanded the case to that court.

Legal Rules. The Court summarized the “general principles” established in prior cases. First, an EIR cannot ignore or assume a solution to water supply problems.
Second, an EIR for a community or specific plan, which by definition contemplates build-out over a period of years, cannot limit its analysis to water supplies needed for the first stage or first few years, but must assume the entire project will be built and analyze the impacts of supplying water to the entire project. Third, future water
supplies must be likely; speculative sources and unrealistic allocations (frequently called “paper water”) are insufficient. An EIR must include a reasoned analysis of the circumstances affecting the likelihood of the water’s availability and analyze the environmental impacts of possible alternative supplies to backstop any uncertainty. The EIR may not simply provide that if the primary future water
supply fails, the development will not proceed, although the opinion provided the circumstances under which such a proviso properly could be included in an EIR.

The Court clarified that an adequate EIR does not require complete certainty with respect to all future water supplies. Rather, it is anticipated that land use and water
supply planning will occur through roughly contemporaneous processes.

The Vineyard Development. The development at issue in the Vineyard case was a large project covering 6,000 acres and containing more than 22,000 residential units for as many as 60,000 people at buildout. The first phase analyzed in the contested EIR would require approximately 8,500 acre-feet per year (AFY), while the total development would require just over 22,000 AFY. Water needs were to be met through conjunctive use of local groundwater and surface water supplies from the American River. The project EIR relied heavily on an EIR previously prepared for a cooperative Sacramento-area water planning effort known as the Water Forum.

02-05-2007

---

Pennington, Moore, Wilkinson, Bell & Dunbar P.A.

Pennington Parter To Serve As Host For NALEO Annual Conference
Pennington Partner Doug Bell will be serving as a member of the host committee for the annual conference of the National Association of Latino Elected Officials (NALEO) to be held in Orlando in June 2007.

02-05-2007

---

Meyer, Suozzi, English & Klein P.C.

MERRILL, CREDIT SUISSE ASK COURT TO END ENRON SUIT
Lawyers for Merrill Lynch and Co. Inc. and Credit Suisse Group on Monday told a U.S. appeals court a $40 billion lawsuit alleging the banks helped hide financial misdeeds that led to Enron's collapse should not proceed as a class-action complaint.

If the three-judge panel from the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals overturns the class certification ruling from U.S. District Judge Melinda Harmon in Houston, it would be a major blow to the investors' case, which is set for trial in April.

The banks argue that Judge Harmon has wrongly allowed investors to allege Merrill Lynch and Credit Suisse were primary participants in the fraud.

But in court papers Merrill Lynch has said there is no evidence to prove the investment bank was a "substantial or significant factor" in the losses that caused Enron's collapse.

And that was an issue the appeals judges focused on, quizzing both sides about whether or not the banks were only secondary actors in the alleged fraud.

"What is the test we use to determine whether a party is an aider and abettor rather than a secondary party?" Judge Jerry Smith, asked Richard Clary, a lawyer for Credit Suisse.

Patrick Coughlin, a attorney representing the plaintiffs, told the court the banks had a fiduciary duty to Enron's investors.

In a class-action lawsuit, investors consolidate their complaints, allowing more clout than if claims were pursued on an individual basis. And if the class-certification were overturned in this case, it would be a massive setback for the plaintiffs.

"It would be much more difficult for the plaintiffs to recover if the appeals court rules in the banks' favor," Lowell Peterson, a lawyer with Meyer Suozzi English & Klein in New York. "A lot of times, it's only realistic for these plaintiffs to pursue claims as a class."

So far, the lawsuit has netted more than $7 billion for investors, including $2 billion or more each from Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce , J.P. Morgan and Citigroup .

Other banks named in the complaint include Toronto Dominion Bank , Royal Bank of Canada and Royal Bank of Scotland Group Plc .

Enron filed for bankruptcy on December 2, 2001. The company's collapse erased thousands of Enron employees' pensions and billion of dollars in investors' money.

Coughlin expects the appeals judges to issue an opinion on matter within a couple of weeks.

02-05-2007

---

McCarter & English, Attorneys At Law

William Heller quoted in regards to YouTube
William Heller was quoted in Business Week and Smart Money in regards to YouTube having to remove all Viacom clips from their site.

02-05-2007

---

Kluger, Peretz, Kaplan & Berlin P.L.

Kluger Peretz Kaplan & Berlin Announces Five New Partners
Kluger Peretz Kaplan & Berlin, a leading Florida law firm, announced today that five attorneys have been elevated to partner.

The new partners and their practice areas are: Jacquline Calderin, Bankruptcy and Creditors’ Rights; James T. Ferrara, Litigation and Dispute Resolution; Michael T. Landen, Litigation & Dispute Resolution; Jonathan D. Louis, Business and Real Estate Transactions; Les Osborne, Bankruptcy and Creditors’ Rights.

“Everyone at Kluger Peretz Kaplan & Berlin is delighted to recognize these five new partners for their outstanding legal skills, dedication to client work, and overall commitment and contributions to the firm and its clients,” said Kluger Peretz Kaplan & Berlin’s

02-05-2007

---

25383 matches |  10760-10766 displayed

1  1536 1537 1538 1539 1540  3627