1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |Collateral Contracts Rule Explained

Collateral Contracts Rule Explained

Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 12.30.05

In Mann v. U.S. (Dec. 7, 2005), the Court of Federal Claims rejected a broad reading of the rule that lost profits are not allowed under contracts collateral to the contract actually breached, explaining that when the lost profits directly relate to the subject of the contract they are recoverable, even if they would have required a transaction with a third party. In this breach of a lease agreement, assuming adequate proof, the contractor is able to recover the lost profits he would have made from releasing the property, as well as certain out-of-pocket costs to improve the property.

Insights

Client Alert | 3 min read | 05.28.26

PFAS Regulatory Alert: EPA Rolls Back RCRA Proposed Rule on “Hazardous Waste” but Does Not Disturb Proposed RCRA Rule on PFAS

Earlier this month, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) withdrew a February 2024 Biden administration proposed rule, “Definition of Hazardous Waste Applicable to Corrective Action for Releases From Solid Waste Management Units,” under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA).[1] The withdrawn proposal would have revised RCRA corrective action regulations to expressly apply the broader statutory definition of “hazardous waste,” rather than only the narrower regulatory definition. Now, EPA is maintaining the status quo for corrective action under RCRA. However, EPA’s withdrawal of its proposed RCRA hazardous waste definition makes no mention of its corresponding proposal from 2024 to list nine per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) as RCRA hazardous constituents.[2] This disjointed withdrawal, while providing some certainty for regulated entities, does not resolve how EPA plans to address PFAS under the RCRA program....

View All Insights