The Red Velvet Lawyer

Significant Losses  at Power Plants  and  Transmission Lines Bird Populations Slumping: Since the release of bird status reports at the Asilomar Conference, bird populations have continued to slump, and the list of North American birds with declining populations or otherwise at risk at the regional and continental levels has increased since 2002 where 131 species were then designated (USFWS 2002).  Today, these include 147 species on the 2008 Birds of Conservation Concern list (USFWS 2008), 92 birds federally listed as Threatened or Endangered on the Endangered Species Act (ESA), State-listed species, and species listed as high priorities on the U.S. Shorebird Conservation Plan, among others.  The growing documented and suspected impacts of structures on birds—from direct collision mortality, barotrauma, electrocutions, cumulative effects, and from habitat fragmentation, disturbance and site avoidance—bode poorly for our b

American Bird Conservancy Will Sue the U.S. Department of Interior  In a news release issued yesterday,  Washington, D.C.-based American Bird Conservancy (ABC) has announced its intention to sue the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI). [They explain that they plan] to charg[e] the agency with multiple violations of federal law in connection with its recent decision to offer wind energy companies and others to obtain 30-year eagle take permits. The previous rule provided for a maximum duration of five years for each permit, which authorizes projects to "take" (i.e., injure, kill or otherwise disturb) eagles. On April 30, ABC sent the DOI and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) a notice of intent to sue , and the group has chosen public interest law firm Meyer Glitzenstein & Crystal to represent it. ABC argues that the new eagle take rule violates the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Endangered Species Act (ESA), and the Ba

Plaintiff Awarded $2.9 Million:  Post-Trail Motions and Appeal Certain Charles Sartran of the Energy & the Law blog discusses what is being characterized as the "first fracking verdict in U.S. History."   Background:   [A] Texas jury awarded $2.9 million to landowners in a case involving alleged hydrocarbon exposure due to hydraulic fracturing operations. Here is the jury verdict . The Parrs sued Aruba Petroleum, alleging that drilling and frac[k]ing at Aruba’s 22 wells located within two miles of the Parr’s 40-acre property in Wise County was making them sick. They alleged a wide array of health issues, including nose bleeds, irregular heartbeat, muscle spasms, and open sores, all of which were allegedly caused by hazardous gases and airborne chemicals emanating from Aruba’s well sites. Outcome: The case proceeded to the jury only on the nuisance claim. The award, for intentionally creating a private nuisance, comprised $275,000 for loss in property va

Using ADR to Compensate Victims of Environmental Catastrophes In my Environmental Dispute Resolution course, I devote one class to a discussion of the claims facilities used in the 9/11 terrorist attacks and the BP Gulf Coast oil spill disaster.  The facilities attempted to handle the inevitable claims arising from these traumatic events in an organized way that allowed expeditious handling of the claims outside of litigation.  Both adopted a form of arbitration.   If well designed, these facilities could also enhance procedural justice for claimants --  voice, careful consideration of the facts by the neutral, impartiality by the neutral, and respectful and dignified treatment of claimants. Updating the Story An  article  in The New York Times today updates the status of the Gulf Coast claims facility.     The Times describes the spill this way: The oil rig fire and the nearly unstoppable fountain of oil that followed at the Macondo Prospec

Some Balance to the Gloom and Doom Stories Brian Leiter, ABA Top 100 Blawger, has shared a conversation among graduates of lower tiered schools here . The conversation started with this question: cheapbrass (Apr 18, 2014 - 2:53 pm) If you are a tier 2 or below grad...and are somewhat successful ($100k+ salary) post here. how far out of school you are and your firm size, or if you are a solo, partner, or associate. Me first: Tier 3, 10+ years out, firm size 5-10, forever associate. The comments, largely stories of success, mirror the stories I hear from most of the alumni of ASL.   If you have your own stories of success, feel free to post them in the comments to this blog.   

Trust: Breach and Repair The Nature of Trust Three elements contribute to the level of trust one has for another: The individual’s chronic disposition towards trusting others; Situational parameters; and The history of their relationship.   Two general categories of trust exist: Calculus-based trust : Grounded in the fear of punishment for violating trust and in the rewards to be derived from preserving it. Identification-based trust :   Based on the identification with the other person’s desires, goals, and intentions.   It exists because the parties can effectively understand and appreciate one another’s wants.   Rebuilding Trust : Re-establishing trust, once breached, is very difficult.    “In conflict, trust is broken, cruel words are spoken, friendships dissolve, love turns to hate, and hate into revenge.”  “Trust is rebuilt not by focusing on what the other person did or did not do, but on improving one’s own behaviors, increasing one’s trustwort

Protect Experiential Learning in Law School -- Let the Market Solve the Problems Two well-respected legal scholars, who also write frequently about how to teach law, offered an op-ed piece in The New York Times , entitled: Don't Skip on Legal Training .  Erwin Chermerinsky and Carrie Menkel-Meadow open the conversation by providing this context: Legal education, like all education, can certainly be improved, but the widely made claims of a “crisis” are exaggerated and do not reflect the contributions legal education makes to achieving justice and well-being for many in the world. In January, an American Bar Association Task Force on the Future of Legal Education declared that it had rushed to release its report because “the urgency of the problem and the serious threats to public confidence demanded rapid action.” This crisis mentality is not only unfounded, but is also creating pressure for reforms that would make legal education worse, not better. The