US Liable for Environmental Remediation Costs Under Contract Clauses
Client Alert | 1 min read | 11.04.11
On October 31, the Court of Federal Claims in Exxon Mobil Corp. v. U.S. held that the government was liable for environmental cleanup costs because it had breached the “Taxes” clause in three World War II-era contracts under which the government had agreed to pay “any new or additional . . . charges” required by federal, state, or local law “by reason of the production, manufacture, sale or delivery” of aviation gasoline. Exxon continues the trend of recovery of environmental remediation costs under government contracts and is consistent with ongoing efforts to recover environmental remediation costs and toxic tort litigation defense costs under Public Law 85-804 indemnification provisions in Cold War-era contracts being conducted for clients by C&M.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 2 min read | 06.15.26
Kansas Federal Court Applies “Selective Enforcement” Theory to Reject DTSA Claim
A Kansas federal court held that inconsistent enforcement of trade secret rights can defeat a claim under the Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA). In Edelman Financial Engines, LLC v. Mariner Wealth Advisors LLC, No. 2:23-cv-02515-HLT (D. Kan. June 5, 2026), the court applied a selective enforcement theory, holding that when a company does not consistently pursue legal remedies against similarly situated former employees, that inconsistency can be affirmative evidence that it failed to protect its trade secrets. While the selective enforcement theory has appeared in academic hypothetical discussions, the decision appears to be one of the clearest judicial applications of a “selective enforcement” theory in a trade secret case.
Client Alert | 3 min read | 06.12.26
Client Alert | 4 min read | 06.12.26
Auto Dealers: The FTC Is Back in the Driver’s Seat — Warning Letters Signal Renewed Federal Scrutiny
Client Alert | 13 min read | 06.12.26


