Legal Considerations for Social Entrepreneurs

Partner Eryn Correa has been invited to present at CMU’s Connects program on Thursday, February 11, 2021 from 12:30 p.m. – 1:30 p.m EST.

Lecture Description: The legal landscape for for-profit social enterprises is still developing. How can you ensure that your business is fulfilling its mission without exposing yourself to additional risk? In this seminar, learn what the law requires so you can make sure you are protected while doing good in the world.

Register Here

Your Lawyer’s Problem with Your Partnering Agreement

For lawyers accustomed to writing contracts from this defensive stance, partnering agreements which are supposed to capture a spirit of collaboration, can present a challenge. Below are a few reasons you may find yourself at odds with the lawyer you want to memorialize your partnership and a few tips on how you can leverage your lawyer’s contract-drafting skills to help draft your partnering agreement.

Author Eryn Correa explores the topic here via The Partnering Initiative.

Why Aren’t Corporations Adopting a Stakeholder Approach to Decision Making?

A myth exists in the corporate world, that maximizing shareholder returns requires laser focus on maximizing shareholder returns. Thinking beyond the shareholders’ bottom line, the myth continues, not only risks financial performance, but shareholder derivative suits as well.

However, emerging data shows that a stakeholder approach to corporate decision-making – where corporations consider the impact of their decisions on consumers, employees, the environment, the community, and greater society, in addition to the shareholders – generates significantly better financial returns.

Author Eryn Correa explores the topic here.

Lawsuit filed by consumer advocates for disclosure of EPA documents

U.S. Right to Know filed a federal lawsuit on Thursday against the Environmental Protection Agency for violating provisions of the Freedom of Information Act.  On May 12, 2016, U.S. Right to Know filed a FOIA request asking for certain records relating to an EPA report on glyphosate as well as records of communications between Monsanto and EPA officials that discussed glyphosate issues.  Under FOIA, the EPA had 20 working days to respond to the request, but well over 190 working days have passed and the EPA has yet to produce any records in response to the request. The EPA has also failed to comply with similar, more recent FOIA requests made by U.S. Right to Know for documentation of EPA dealings with Monsanto regarding glyphosate, though those requests are not part of this lawsuit.

Attorneys acting on behalf of dozens of people claiming Monsanto Co.’s Roundup herbicide gave them cancer allege that EPA officials undertook efforts protect Monsanto’s interests and unfairly aid the agrichemical industry.  Plaintiffs now seek to depose, Jess Rowland, a private citizen who formerly served as Monsanto’s chief “friend” within the EPA, and left EPA mysteriously within days of an “inadvertent” leak and subsequent retraction of an EPA draft report on the safety of glyphosate, that bore Mr. Rowland’s signature.  U.S. Right to Know's FOIA request very may yield information relevant to the EPA's leaked report and the circumstances of Mr. Rowland's departure from the agency.  

 

 

EPA Official's suspicious links to Roundup manufacturer comes under increased scrutiny. 

A federal judge said Monday that he’s inclined to order the retired official, Jess Rowland, to submit to questioning by lawyers for the plaintiffs.  Plaintiffs attorneys contend he had a "highly suspicious" relationship with Monsanto. Rowland chaired a committee that disputed the findings of the World Health Organization that Roundup is linked to increased rates of non-Hodgkin lymphoma and left his job just days after his report was leaked to the press. Rowland is expected to testify as a paid expert on behalf of Monsanto.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-02-27/monsanto-cancer-suits-turn-to-alleged-whitewash-by-epa-official