Kean Miller

Subscribe to Kean Miller's Posts

Effective Date: Upon signature of the governor which occurred on June 8, 2006.

Limitation On Some Matters: Does not apply to a case in which the court, on or before March 27, 2006 (first day of the legislative session), has issued or signed an order setting the case for trial, regardless if such trial date is continued.

Opt-in Provision: A party who filed a judicial demand has the right to come under S.B. 655 and can do so by filing a notice in the court where the case is pending, a notice of the exercise of such right within 60 days of the effective date of the Act.

Remediation Monies: Monies for remediation projects awarded shall be placed in the registry of the court and the remediation plan shall be implemented under the supervision of the agency with the court maintaining supervisory jurisdiction until plan completed. Monies may be funded incrementally. Any leftover funds are returned to the party who paid the money into the registry of the court. The money does not go to the landowner, but into the remediation project. Note that an award will include monies for investigation and remediation.

“Feasible Plan:” The definition of “feasible plan” for a remediation to be performed under the Act means the most reasonable plan which addresses “environmental damage” (see definition below) in compliance with the Constitution to protect the environment, public health, safety and welfare, and is in compliance with the specific relevant and applicable standards and regulations promulgated by a state agency in accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act in effect at the time of clean up to remediate contamination resulting from oilfield or exploration and production operations or waste.Continue Reading SUMMARY OF KEY FEATURES OF S.B. 655 (the “Act”)

It is common for an employer to require an employee to provide a medical release or to submit to a medical examination before returning to work after a sickness or medical leave. Some employees contend the time it takes to complete this process amounts to involuntary FMLA leave and they should receive all benefits of the Act related to such leave. In a recent Fifth Circuit decision, the court recognized that an employer can place an employee on “involuntary” FMLA leave if the employee has provided the employer with notice of the employee’s “serious health condition,” and the involuntary nature of the leave does not deprive the employee of rights under the Act.    Willis v. Coca Cola Enterprises, Inc., 2006 WL 827359 (5th Cir. March 31, 2006).

The facts in Willis are interesting. Willis was a Senior Account Manager with Coca Cola Enterprises. On a Monday, in May 2003, she called her supervisor and told him she would not be at work that day because she was sick. In the same conversation, she told her supervisor she was pregnant, but she did not specifically tell her supervisor she was sick because of her pregnancy.Continue Reading 5TH CIRCUIT RECOGNIZES THAT AN EMPLOYER’S PLACEMENT OF AN EMPLOYEE ON LEAVE CAN RESULT IN “INVOLUNTARY” FMLA LEAVE IF…

On Friday, June 16th at Juban’s Restaurant, Kean Miller held its quarterly Business Briefing Seminar. Business and Corporate partner Dean Cazenave gave a very informative program entitled An Overview: Employment Agreements and Executive Compensation.

The program consisted of key provisions and pitfalls in drafting employment agreements for employers, and an overview of executive compensation…

Distinguished fellow blogger Stephen Holzer, at Environmental Legal Blogs has an excellent short analysis of the U.S. Supreme Court Decision in Rapanos v. United States. Check it out here, and check out his blog frequently for similar insightful posts. His concluding comment on the case:

“Nonetheless, for those of us accustomed over the last 40-50 years to seeing the Supreme Court rarely put brakes of any kind on the federal government’s appetite for expansion, today was indeed one for the books.”
Continue Reading Stephen Holzer (Environmental Legal Blogs) Analyzes Supreme Court Decision on Clean Water Act

In Hamilton v. Winder, 2006-0994 (La. 6/16/06), 2006 WL 1669429, the Louisiana Supreme Court held that the district court had the power under LSA-C.C.P. art. 1631(A) to “bump” a consistently tardy juror in the middle of trial and replace him with an alternate. Although Article 1769 states that “Alternate jurors…shall replace jurors who…become unable or disqualified to perform their duties,” the Supreme Court held that the trial court did not have to determine that the sluggish juror in question was either “unable” or “disqualified” to perform his duties.
Continue Reading District Court Has Power To Replace Chronically-Tardy Juror with Alternate

The 18th Judicial District Court in Louisiana (Iberville, West Baton Rouge and Pointe Coupee Parishes) has requested, and received, an ad hoc judge appointment. Judge Thomas W. Tanner has been appointed by the Louisiana Supreme Court to handle all asbestos cases. Ad hoc judges are used occasionally in asbestos cases and have been appointed for…

Louisiana’s Title V permit program requires each permit to contain “a schedule of compliance consistent with LAC 33:III.517.E.4.” Under Section 517.E.4, and its federal counterpart 40 C.F.R. 70.6(c), the permit application must contain a “narrative description of how the source will achieve compliance and a compliance schedule” with respect to “any applicable requirements with which the source is not in compliance at the time of permit application submittal.” The schedule proposed must “resemble and be at least as stringent as that contained in any judicial consent decree or administrative order or compliance order to which the source is subject.” Id. Progress reports are required at least every six months. Id.
Continue Reading When Is a Compliance Schedule Required In a Title V Permit?

From an article in today’s Insurance Journal, the Louisiana Commissioner of Insurance has issued an advisory letter to the companies with homeowners insurance policies in Louisiana, requesting their cooperation in extending from one to two years the prescriptive period for policyholders with Hurricane Katrina and/or Rita claims, the Louisiana Department of Insurance reported.

The…

Senate Bill 655 has now cleared the House Natural Resources Committee and goes to the full House. It has already passed the Senate. Here is the current text of the act.

Under the current law, La. R.S. 30:2015.1, anyone suing for damages for the “evaluation and remediation of any contamination or pollution that is alleged to impact or threaten usable ground water” has to provide written notice to the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ), who then have the right to intervene in the lawsuit. “Usable ground water” is statutorily defined as Groundwater Classification I or II under DEQ’s RECAP regulations.
Continue Reading SB655 – Remediation of Oil and Gas Sites

The Louisiana Supreme Court has ruled that interstate airplanes and other interstate transportation equipment will be subject to Louisiana state and local use taxes if a taxable moment outside of use in interstate commerce is found. The Court overruled cases which had previously found that transportation equipment used in interstate commerce would not be subject to use tax unless the equipment was used for intrastate transportation.
In Word of Life Christian Center vs. Mark West, Administrator, Ascension Parish Sales and Use Tax Authority, 04-1484 (La. 4/17/2006), _____ So.2d______, the Louisiana Supreme Court reviewed the taxability of airplanes purchased by the Word of Life Christian Center.
Continue Reading INTERSTATE AIRPLANES OTHER TRANSPORTATION EQUIPMENT SUBJECT TO LOUISIANA USE TAX