Sorry for interrupting, but there is something we need to tell you...

We have updated our Cookie Policy to reflect changes in the law on cookies used on websites in Europe. This website uses cookies to maximize your experience and help us to understand how we can improve it. To find out more click here.

Cookies are text files containing small amounts of data which are downloaded to your computer, or other device, when you visit a website. Cookies allow us to recognize your computer and improve your experience on our website. Some cookies are also necessary for the technical operation of our website. Please read our Cookie Policy which provides important information about the cookies we use, how we use them and how they can be deleted. Please remember that deleting cookies may affect your experience of our website.

Show less.

Accept and hide this message
Pillsbury Pillsbury Pillsbury
Email Page Print Friendly Version Text Size

Publications & Presentations

We encourage you to peruse this Publications & Presentations section for timely analysis and industry insights, including bylined articles, client alerts, white papers, practice and industry newsletters, audio and video broadcasts, featuring interviews with our lawyers, as well as case studies highlighting compelling legal challenges our clients have faced.

Also, please visit our Events page to learn more about upcoming seminars, CLE programs, and other presentations which may be of interest.

Recent Publications

Saving Private Partnerships: Court Upholds P3 Project against CEQA Challenge under Save Tara
Authors: Norman F. Carlin, Emily M. Burkett

A 2008 California Supreme Court decision, Save Tara v. City of West Hollywood,1 cast doubt on local governments’ ability to enter into agreements with private developers prior to completing project review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). In a pair of recent decisions,2 the Fourth District Court of Appeal upheld a public-private partnership (P3) water project against two CEQA challenges. In the first case, the court found that an agreement among the private and public partners and another public agency was not an improper pre-CEQA commitment under Save Tara. Focusing on the agency’s reservation of discretion to reject or modify the project, the court took a practical approach which may be applied to a wide range of agreements between public agencies and private entities, including but not limited to P3s. In the second case, the court held that the public partner properly acted as CEQA lead agency, notwithstanding its interest in the P3 project.

Is That Product Liability Claim Covered?
Authors: Matthew D. Stockwell, Amanda Senske

This article was originally published in the June 2016 edition of Claims magazine, a PropertyCasualty360 publication.

Commercial General Liability ("CGL") insurance policies broadly provide defense and indemnity coverage for claims of bodily injury and property damage asserted against an insured. Product manufacturers are frequently called upon to defend against claims that their products caused bodily injury or property damage. Construction companies, for example, also face significant exposure for claims arising out of alleged faulty workmanship or defective construction. These policyholders look to their insurance companies to provide them with a defense against any such claims, and for indemnity in the event of a judgment or a settlement.

New EU Data Laws & Cyber Security Breaches - Preparing For Change
Source: Hotel Business
Authors: Rafi Azim-Khan, Steven P. Farmer

As the volume of sensitive data that hotels store ever increases, the use of mobile devices to make and manage bookings continues to grow and cyber villains become ever more sophisticated, it is perhaps of no surprise that we hear about new instances of information theft and data loss in the hotel sector on a frequent basis.

Wyoming v. Dept. of Interior Rejects Hydraulic Fracturing Rule on Federal and Tribal Lands as “End Run” around Congress
Authors: Norman F. Carlin, Jeffrey A. Knight, Bryan M. Stockton

In Wyoming v. Department of Interior1, the Obama Administration faced a setback to its environmental agenda, as a federal district court judge struck down Bureau of Land Management (BLM) regulations on hydraulic fracturing on federal and Indian lands. Those pleased and disappointed by the decision are alternatively characterizing it as a broadly applicable rebuke to agency overreach, a vindication of tribal sovereignty, or an environmental disaster. In fact, it is the latest word in an ongoing saga of legislation, regulation and prior litigation, leading Congress to expressly bar the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from regulating hydraulic fracturing in most situations. Heeding that clear directive, the district court concluded that, “[h]aving explicitly removed the only source of specific federal agency authority over fracking, it defies common sense for BLM to argue that Congress intended to allow it to regulate the same activity under a general statute that says nothing about hydraulic fracturing.” 2 The Administration has already appealed the decision.

Brexit: What Now?
Authors: Samuel J. Pearse, James Campbell

The United Kingdom has voted to leave the European Union. The vote is not legally binding but Prime Minister David Cameron has already acknowledged that the will of the people must be followed. We consider the key preliminary questions.

Practice / Industry
Focus Teams
From Date
To Date
Pillsbury Pillsbury Pillsbury