[email protected]


Strategic, practical and business-friendly solutions to challenges stemming from contamination, regulatory and environmental disputes—that’s what clients can count on when engaging M&R’s Environmental Practice Group. Our environmental practitioners leverage their expertise, as well as that of the firm’s class action & complex litigation, corporate, insurance and real estate lawyers, to deliver a range of services to clients across several industries.

Whether advising on environmental compliance matters, cleanup obligations, Superfund (CERCLA) litigation, toxic tort disputes, federal and state enforcement proceedings, land use matters, brownfields, California’s Proposition 65 or the environmental risks associated with mergers, acquisitions or real estate transactions and financings, we work to minimize the impact that environmental issues have upon our clients’ business operations and objectives, all the while maximizing opportunity.

As the drumbeat of environmental awareness and sustainability echoes and environmental litigation and environmental sensitivity in transactions become more and more prevalent, M&R’s Environmental Practice Group stands ready to help clients manage risks associated with the ever-changing environmental landscape and navigate the environmental law requirements they face.

Areas of Expertise

Breach of Representations & Warranties
California Proposition 65 Counseling
CERCLA/ Cost Recovery & Contribution
Clean-Up & Development Issues
Contract Negotiation & Drafting
Environmental Compliance Issues
Environmental Subrogation
Insurance Coverage & Litigation
Mergers & Acquisitions (including environmental due diligence)
Toxic Torts
UST Cleanup

Representative Matters

Successfully argued on a motion for summary judgment that our client sued in federal court for allegedly causing water pollution could neither be considered a proper “arranger” under CERCLA, nor liable for damages under the law of nuisance.

Litigated an environmental response case arising out of mandated cleanup costs for toxic chemicals allegedly disbursed by a dry-cleaning business. Avoided liability for cleanup payments on behalf of our client by convincing the plaintiff that other parties were responsible for polluted waters.

Represented product manufacturers in lawsuits with their liability insurance companies arising out of environmental and toxic tort claims. Obtained a favorable resolution on behalf of our client by overcoming insurers’ assertions that underlying layers of coverage were not exhausted and occurrences did not take place in particular policy years.

Successfully defended several product manufacturers in California Proposition 65 cases, including a bicycle manufacturer facing claims that cables on its bikes were subject to Proposition 65 disclosures.

Negotiated a first-of-its-kind $400 million joint water supply/contaminant cleanup project on behalf of a manufacturer alleged to have contributed to the contamination of a large Superfund site. Parties to the yearlong negotiation included the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Attorney General’s Office, several water supply companies and various alleged contaminators, and the resulting cleanup project now serves as a model for EPA-driven Superfund settlements.

Obtained dismissal of a toxic tort case filed against a municipality after successfully launching a legislative investigation into environmental conditions at a prominent local high school, which investigation (and case) arose out of allegations that the operation of an oil well immediately adjacent to the high school posed serious health risks to teachers, students and neighboring property owners.

Jointly represented a multinational corporation in the defense of a toxic tort case filed by more than 1,500 residents claiming injuries due to the ingestion of contaminated drinking water. Obtained a favorable settlement on behalf of our client after protracted litigation and numerous appeals, including one before the California Supreme Court.

There is no corresponding news at this time.

There is no corresponding news at this time.

There is no corresponding news at this time.

There is no corresponding news at this time.

There is no corresponding news at this time.

There is no corresponding news at this time.

There is no corresponding news at this time.