Overview of Customer Premises Liability Claims Based on Alleged Exposure to COVID-19

$95.00

CLE credits earned: 1 GENERAL Credit (WA 1 Law and Legal)

This CLE will cover customer-based premises liability claims that retailers may face as they reopen to the public during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. We will provide an overview of premises liability theory and elements of the claim and examine past court cases addressing the spread of communicable diseases. We will then address ways to mitigate retailers’ potential legal exposure, along with theories we expect may be raised by plaintiffs’ counsel. The CLE will conclude with thoughts about the nature of the legal exposure from such claims and how cases may be resolved, followed by a question and answer session.

Key topics to be discussed:

• The ways in which Courts may apply existing concepts of premises liability law to COVID-19 exposure claims.
• Steps retailers can take to mitigate the legal risk of premises liability claims based on alleged exposure to COVID-19.
• Potential defenses to claims of COVID-19 exposure.

Date / Time: July 10, 2020

•   1:00 pm – 2:00 pm Eastern
•   12:00 pm – 1:00 pm Central
•   11:00 am – 11:00 am Mountain
•   10:00 am – 11:00 am Pacific

Choose a format:

•   Live Video Broadcast/Re-Broadcast: Watch Program “live” in real-time, must sign-in and watch program on date and time set above. May ask questions during presentation via chat box. Qualifies for “live” CLE credit.
•   On-Demand Video: Access CLE 24/7 via on-demand library and watch program anytime. Qualifies for self-study CLE credit. On-demand versions are made available 24 hours after the original recording date and are view-able for up to one year.

Select your state to see if this class is approved for CLE credit.

Choose the format you want.

Clear

Original Broadcast Date: July 10, 2020

Joe Orzano | Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Joe Orzano is a partner in the Boston office of Seyfarth Shaw LLP and is the national co-chair of the Firm’s Product Liability & Complex Tort practice group.
Joe’s practice focuses on consumer fraud class actions and competitor advertising disputes, as well as product liability and complex tort litigation. Joe also maintains an active counseling practice in which he draws on his litigation experience to provide sound, practical advice to companies to help them mitigate litigation risk. Joe has litigated claims that invoke the consumer protection statutes of multiple jurisdictions, including those frequently asserted in class actions in California, Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, Texas, Missouri, Illinois, and Florida. Joe has particularly deep knowledge of California’s Unfair Competition Law, Consumers Legal Remedies Act, and False Advertising Law. Joe also has expansive knowledge in the area of class certification requirements, including evolving case law in the false advertising consumer class action context. He has litigated consumer class actions filed in state and federal courts around the country, and has litigated related class actions centralized for pretrial purposes by the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation. Joe has advised clients on a variety of complex statutory and regulatory schemes, particularly on the food labeling and recall provisions of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, organic certification and labeling requirements under the US Department of Agriculture’s National Organic Program, labeling requirements of the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act and Wool Products Labeling Act, requirements of the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act, consumer disclosure and warranty requirements of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, and the warning requirements of California’s Proposition 65. Additionally, he advises clients on the substantiation requirements for marketing claims.

Mike Jusczyk | Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Mike Jusczyk is a litigation associate in the Boston office of Seyfarth Shaw LLP.
Mike has extensive experience in state and federal courts litigating insurance coverage matters, defending personal injury actions involving claims arising out of auto accidents slip-and-falls, product defects, and premises liability, and in defending bad faith settlement claims against insurance companies. He has successfully defended claims involving dangerous conditions on commercial premises, construction accidents, and cases involving failure to warn. Mike also maintains a pro bono immigration practice in which he has successfully represented unaccompanied minors in immigration court and in federal court habeas proceedings.
 
 

Accreditation Policy
myLawCLE seeks accreditation for all programs in all states. (Accreditation for paralegals sought thru NALA and NFPA paralegal associations.) Each attending attorney/paralegal will receive a certificate of completion following the close of the CLE program as proof of attendance. In required states, myLawCLE records attorney/paralegals attendance, in all other states attorney/paralegal is provided with the approved CLE certificate to submit to their state bar or governing association.

    Automatic MCLE Approvals

All myLawCLE CLE programs are accredited automatically either directly or via reciprocity in the following states: AK, AR, CA, CT, FL, HI, IL, MO, MT, ND, NH, NM, NJ, NY, WV, and VT. (AZ does not approve CLE programs, but accepts our certificates for CLE credit.)

    Live Video Broadcasts

Live video broadcasts are new live CLE programs being streamed and recorded for the first time. All of these programs qualify for “Live” CLE credit in all states except NV, OH, MS, IN, UT, PA, GA, and LA —these states require in-person attendance to qualify for “Live” CLE credit.

    “Live” Re-Broadcasts

“Live” Re-broadcasts are replays of previous recorded CLE programs, set on a specific date and time and where the original presenting speakers calls in live at the end of the event to answer questions. This “live” element allows for “live” Re-broadcast CLEs to qualify for “Live” CLE credits in most states. [The following states DO NOT allow for “live” CLE credits on re-broadcast CLEs: NV, OH, MS, IN, UT, PA, GA, and LA]

Reciprocity
Many states allow for credit to be granted on a 1:1 reciprocal basis for courses approved in another mandatory CLE jurisdiction state. This is known as a reciprocity provision and includes the following states: AK, AR, HI, CT, FL, ME, MO, MT, ND, NH, NM, VT, NJ, NY, and WV. myLawCLE does not seek direct accreditation of live webinars or teleconferences in these states.