Posts

Roth: Intuitive energy trend?

By Jim Roth, Director and Chair of the Firm’s Clean Energy Practice Group. This column was originally published in The Journal Record on May 7, 2018.


Jim Roth is a Director and Chair of the firm’s Clean Energy Practice.

Roth: Intuitive energy trend?

A good strategic partnership is even better when it can help the environment and a company’s bottom line. Intuit, known best for software programs TurboTax and QuickBooks, has partnered with Just Energy, a Texas retail energy company, on an exciting and unique renewable energy affinity program, unveiled just before Earth Day.

Under the partnership, Intuit plans to share its corporate wind power procurement in Texas with commercial and residential customers, providing renewable energy at discounted prices. This innovative program was created with assistance from Renewable Power Direct, a national green energy marketer.

Intuit’s affinity program, Purely Green, features three-year contracts for residential service offered in the Dallas-Fort Worth area at 9.3 cents per kilowatt-hour, a rate that appears to be lower than much of the brown power offers in the market at this time. This partnership leverages the environmental benefits but also offers the collective buying power to make green energy more affordable for all.

Google, Target, Wal-Mart, and General Motors are known for buying clean energy. Right here in our state, the Google data center buys its power from Oklahoma wind farms and the Grand River Dam Authority’s hydropower. While some of these corporations have internal commitments to reduce environmental impacts, for others, it’s just good business. Some companies simply buy the clean power for its lower cost. As GM’s global manager of renewable energy said last year, “it’s been primarily all driven off economics.”

The lower energy bills Intuit and other trailblazing companies enjoy can be attributed to several causes. Renewable technology hard costs continue to plummet, federal and state incentives have contributed to overall savings, and power purchase agreements provide the ability to negotiate terms deemed fair by those contracting, as well as offer a stable, reliable price for the purchaser and the buyer over an extended period of time.

As here, economies of scale allow the Intuit program to be cheaper for many. The company’s approach to sharing its power with others may be the first of its kind. Renewable Power Direct CEO Eric Alam expects “other large companies that buy wind and solar energy to begin exploring how best to share and leverage their green energy choices for customers and employees. This could significantly boost future demand for renewable energy and greatly expand the climate benefits of corporate green power programs.”

Here’s hoping others follow suit to save money and Mother Earth, while also helping to develop our region’s clean energy options.

(Disclosure: Jim Roth currently serves on the board of directors of the American Clean Skies Foundation, an advocacy organization in Washington, D.C., focused on American natural gas and clean energies, which was founded by the late Aubrey McClendon and maintains an interest in Renewable Power Direct.)

Jim Roth, a former Oklahoma corporation commissioner, is an attorney with Phillips Murrah P.C. in Oklahoma City, where his practice focuses on clean, green energy for Oklahoma.

Tort reform shows how Oklahoma product liability law evolves

This Gavel to Gavel guest column, originally published in The Journal Record on June 4, 2015, contains insights by Phillips Murrah attorney Cody Cooper concerning Oklahoma Product Liability Law. Cody Cooper contributed to “An Overview of Oklahoma Product Liability Law,” co-authored by Phillips Murrah Directors Tom Wolfe and Lyndon Whitmire for the April 2015 edition of the Oklahoma Bar Journal.
View Cody Cooper’s attorney profile here.


Cody J. Cooper is an associate attorney with Phillips Murrah whose practice is concentrated in commercial litigation, product liability, and intellectual property.

Cody J. Cooper is an attorney with Phillips Murrah whose practice is concentrated in commercial litigation, product liability, and intellectual property.

Exploding gas cans, scolding-hot coffee, misfiring rifles, popping exercise balls and sticking gas pedals. What do these things have in common? Each of these products was the center of some of the most memorable product liability lawsuits.

Since Kirkland v. General Motors, the Oklahoma Supreme Court has recognized product liability claims and the law has continued to grow and evolve.

For simplicity’s sake, law develops primarily in two ways: the Oklahoma Legislature enacts statutes and case law is developed from courts’ opinions applying those statutes.

The Oklahoma Legislature creates the statutes by which claims and parties are governed and this has an obvious, direct impact in Oklahoma product liability actions.

Oklahoma courts then interpret these statutes and apply them in product liability lawsuits. The courts’ decisions provide guiding authority on issues and allow parties to understand how laws will be applied in the future.

Both play critical roles, but can lead to conflict over how the law will ultimately operate. Such is the case currently with tort reform. In the past few years, wide-ranging legislative changes have caused conflict and consternation at the Capitol and in the courtroom.

Tort reform statutes have had widespread implications in product liability lawsuits, including caps on potential recoverable damages, providing substantial protection for product sellers, requiring plaintiffs to provide medical records, and shielding manufacturers from claims regarding inherently unsafe products.

In 2009, the Oklahoma Legislature passed House Bill 2818 (the 2009 Act), followed by a 2011 statute amending many parts of the 2009 Act. In 2013, several individual cases held tort reform unconstitutional, which led to the Oklahoma Supreme Court striking the entire act as being unconstitutional for violation of the single-subject rule that requires that laws only address a single subject – to prevent logrolling. Later that year, the Oklahoma Legislature through a special session, modified and revived many of the laws struck down by the Oklahoma Supreme Court and enacted new ones.

The clash between legislators and Oklahoma courts make it difficult for parties to understand what the future holds for product liability law in Oklahoma. The only certainty is that the law will continue to evolve.

 

 

Avoiding the b-word: The many faces of financial restructuring

Clay Ketter’s guest column, Gavel to Gavel, originally published in The Journal Record  on Mar. 11, 2015.
View Clay Ketter’s attorney profile here.


Clayton D. Ketter is a litigator whose practice involves a wide range of business litigation in both federal and state court, including extensive experience in financial restructurings and bankruptcy matters.

Clayton D. Ketter is a litigator whose practice involves a wide range of business litigation in both federal and state court, including extensive experience in financial restructurings and bankruptcy matters.

The current price of crude oil is sure to make people use language that is inappropriate in polite conversation. As news of idled rigs, layoffs and credit defaults becomes a daily occurrence, the use of the b-word is sure to come up more and more. Of course, I’m referring to that nasty little 10-letter word, bankruptcy.

The stigma that once surrounded a bankruptcy filing has subsided as multiple high-profile companies such as American Airlines, General Motors and the Los Angeles Dodgers have entered the bankruptcy process and emerged as stronger, more viable businesses. Despite these successes, one group that has been gradually shunning the use of the b-word is, surprisingly, bankruptcy attorneys. Yes, the people most familiar with the ins and outs of the Bankruptcy Code, rather than announce themselves as bankruptcy experts, are instead asking to be referred to as financial restructuring specialists. This is particularly true for those attorneys that focus on businesses, as opposed to individuals, facing financial difficulties.

At first glance, it would appear that a rebranding effort is the motivation for this shift. Bankruptcy may suggest failure, death, layoffs and closings. Financial restructuring, comparatively, signifies repair and rebirth of a business. Although marketing has played a part, it fails to explain the whole story. The use of the phrase “financial restructuring” reflects the reality that debtors and creditors facing financial stress have many options at their disposal, not just bankruptcy.

Workouts, divestitures, mergers and asset sales are just some of the tools that a financial restructuring professional may utilize to assist debtors and creditors in resolving financial difficulties. Options also include a bankruptcy filing, whether it be a Chapter 11 reorganization or a Chapter 7 liquidation. However, a bankruptcy filing is not always the right choice. Depending on the circumstances, it often makes sense to avoid the time and expense of a formal proceeding, and instead resolve matters out of court. The title of financial restructuring attorney reflects the fact that multiple options are available to address and repair economic trouble, not just bankruptcy.

Should crude oil prices remain depressed, we are certain to see the b-word used more frequently. However, it’s important to remember that, depending on the circumstances, a more conservative approach may be better.