14041 research outputs found
Sort by
Displacement and Preemption of Climate Nuisance Claims
Get PDFNew York City and other municipalities have filed state-law-based nuisance suits against fossil fuel companies seeking compensatory damages for the consequences of climate change. Previous nuisance claims, filed under federal common law, were held to be displaced by federal environmental statutes. Defendants have argued that state-law-based claims should likewise be preempted. Yet while the enactment of federal regulatory statutes displaces federal common law actions for interstate pollution, such enactments do not necessarily preempt state common law actions, even where pollution crosses state boundaries, as it is more difficult to preempt state common law than it is to displace federal common law. In City of New York v. Chevron Corp., however, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit concluded the government plaintiffs may not “utilize state tort law to hold multinational oil companies liable for the damages caused by global greenhouse gas emissions.” While there may be strong policy arguments for this result, the legal basis for this conclusion is weak. This article provides background on the use of common law suits to address pollution concerns and the history of state-level pollution control measures, before describing the current doctrines of displacement and preemption, and explaining why the legal arguments for preempting state-law-based climate suits are insufficient to justify dismissing these cases, even if equivalent federal common law actions would be properly displaced
A Duty to Diversify
Get PDFFiduciary duties reflect the central role of leaders in corporate governance. Those with the most responsibility benefit the most from corporate success, but also bear commensurate fiduciary responsibilities. Equality, diversity, and inclusion may seem an odd fit among other fiduciary duties. However, fiduciary duties are where governance imposes the burden of “doing the right thing.” Fiduciary duties involve normatively good behavior that proves essential to ensuring responsible decision-making and achieving positive outcomes for firms.Corporate law allows, encourages and perhaps, today, even mandates, corporate leaders to do the right thing. Not only does it seem appropriate to ask corporate leaders, such as institutional investors, to carry this fiduciary duty, but imposing this duty on them may prove far more effective than other efforts. As a new generation of leaders rise to lead, the resulting changes may prove revolutionary, both for firms and investors
Volume 09 (Part 1)
Get PDFCity of Cleveland, plaintiff vs. The Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company, defendant : civil action no. C75-560; proceedings had before the Honorable Robert B. Krupansky of said court, commencing on Tuesday, September 2, 1980 in the District Court of the United States for the Northern District of Ohio, Eastern Division
10/14/80-10/16/80https://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/clevelandcei/1008/thumbnail.jp
Parsing Privilege: Does the Attorney–Client Privilege Attach to an Angry Client’s Criminal Threat Voiced During an Otherwise Privileged Attorney–Client Consultation?
Get PDF
“DE MINIMIS ‘DIMINI-MISSED?’” How Threat Threatened, But Preserved, Title VII’s Materially Adverse Requirement in §703(a)(1) Employment Discrimination Actions
Get PDF
Access Repository Dashboard
Do you manage Open Research Online? Become a CORE Member to access insider analytics, issue reports and manage access to outputs from your repository in the CORE Repository Dashboard! 👇