Kenneth J. Hollenbeck
Managing Partner

About

Kenneth J. Hollenbeck is a member and former Chair of the firm’s Environmental and Land Use Law Group and a member of its Business Law Group. Mr. Hollenbeck has extensive experience in all areas of environmental law, including environmental permitting, compliance and counseling; energy project siting, development, finance and regulation; and the environmental liability/risk allocation aspects of corporate, utility asset and real property transactions. He has published and/or presented numerous articles on the transactional, permitting and liability aspects of environmental law and practice. He serves as Co-Chair of the University Seminar on Legal, Social and Economic Aspects of Environmental Protection Policy at Columbia University.

Mr. Hollenbeck has extensive experience representing clients from the solid waste, materials recovery and recycling industries, with particular emphasis on the transactional and facility development/permitting aspects of the practice. He has handled asset and/or stock acquisition and disposition transactions having an aggregate valuation in excess of $1.5 billion, and has directed countless facility development/permitting initiatives throughout the New York/New Jersey, Mid-Atlantic and New England regions. For the past five years, he has been actively involved in the development of rail carrier transload facilities designed to handle various waste commodities on behalf of rail carriers and other non-traditional waste industry participants.

Mr. Hollenbeck’s experience in structuring, negotiating and managing complex corporate transactions extends to a variety of businesses outside the solid waste industry, including the independent power production and transmission pipeline facility areas. He regularly represents emerging growth businesses and other companies in capital formation transactions, as well as mergers and acquisitions, strategic alliances, and corporate control and governance matters.

Read full bio

Publications

Title Publisher Date
Green Justice: Should the Poor Inherit the Polluted? New Jersey Law Journal June 6, 1994
Environmental Justice - When Minorities and Poor Live in Toxic Parts of Town, is it Because of Discriminatory Intent or the Effects of Broader Social Forces? The Recorder Fall 1994

View all publications

Blog

Spill Act Contribution Claims Can Be Filed Prior to DEP Remediation Plan Approval
Posted on Tuesday August 12, 2014

Spill Act Contribution Claims Can Be Filed Prior to DEP Remediation Plan ApprovalUnder a recent decision by the Supreme Court of New Jersey, businesses can pursue contribution claims under the Spill Compensation and Control Act (Spill Act) prior to the conclusion of the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection’s (NJDEP) enforcement efforts. In Magic Petroleum v. ExxonMobil, the specific question before the court was whether the doctrine of primary jurisdiction, under which the court declines original jurisdiction and refers specific issues to the appropriate administrative body, applies to Spill Act contribution claims. The Facts of the Case In 2003, the NJDEP sued Magic Petroleum, Inc. (Magic) for the costs of remediating hazardous material on property owned by the company. Although Magic maintained that other parties contributed to the contamination, Magic was held liable for all of the cleanup expenses pursuant to the DEP’s determination that Magic was a discharger. During the course of the NJDEP proceedings, Magic filed a claim for contribution under the Spill Act, alleging that Exxon Mobil Corporation (ExxonMobil) and several other parties were partly responsible for the remediation costs. The trial court dismissed Magic’s claim based on the doctrine of primary jurisdiction, concluding that the contribution claim could only be filed following complete remediation of the site. The Appellate Division affirmed. It concluded that the NJDEP was in the best position to identify the extent of the contamination, analyze the extent of the discharge and devise a cleanup strategy; therefore, any claims for contribution should await the agency’s approval of a remediation plan. The Legal Background The Spill Act prohibits the “discharge” ofread more

The post Spill Act Contribution Claims Can Be Filed Prior to DEP Remediation Plan Approval appeared first on businesslawnews.com.

EPA Seeks Public Comment On Fracking
Posted on Wednesday May 21, 2014

frackingThe Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) executed an advanced notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPR) on May 9, 2014. The ANPR seeks public comment on whether the EPA should collect and publicly disclose information on hydraulic fracturing chemicals. The public will have 90 days to submit comments. The ANPR seeks to obtain input on a broad range of issues related to fracking chemicals. Examples of public opinions being sought include: Should the EPA collect data on fracking chemicals and mixtures? If so, which legal mechanism(s) should the EPA use to obtain such information from the regulated community? Whether the EPA should require the fracking community to submit the information or should it be voluntary? What companies or practices would be subject to reporting requirements or other regulation of fracking chemicals? What is the best method for collecting, reporting or disclosing public health and environmental data, including studies conducted by companies in the hydraulic fracturing industry? How can the EPA protect public health and the environment associated with fracking chemicals and mixtures? What mechanisms could be developed to make information that is reported to EPA publically disclosed and available? How can the EPA minimize reporting burdens and costs, avoid duplication of efforts and maximize public understanding of fracking chemicals? Once the EPA has collected all the information received during the public comment period, the agency will determine whether it should proceed with the creation of a proposed rule to regulate fracking chemicals and mixtures. Before the rule becomes final and enforceable, the EPA willread more

The post EPA Seeks Public Comment On Fracking appeared first on businesslawnews.com.

Apple Loses First Round of E-Book Lawsuit
Posted on Wednesday July 31, 2013

Is Mediation the Solution to Epic IP Battle between Apple and Samsung?Last month, a New York federal judge ruled that Apple conspired to raise the retail price of e-books in violation of U.S. anti-trust laws.  "Apple seized the moment and brilliantly played its hand," said Judge Denise Cote. "It provided the Publisher Defendants with the vision, the format, the timetable, and the coordination they needed to raise e-book prices." While all of the publishers named in the U.S. Department of Justice’s anti-trust lawsuit settled, Apple brought the case to trial in June.  The company vehemently disputed allegations that its e-book contracts with the publishers should be characterized as anti-competitive. Meanwhile, the DOJ argued that Apple was aware that the CEOs of Hachette Book Group, HarperCollins Publishers, Macmillan, The Penguin Group, and Simon & Schuster were frustrated with Amazon’s discounted e-book pricing structure. Apple approached the five publishers with an arrangement that increased the price of many best-selling e-books to $12.99 or $14.99 by moving from traditional wholesale pricing—where retailers set the price of both digital and physical books—to an agency model under which publishers establish e-book prices and retailers receive a commission. As highlighted in court documents, the publishers then worked together to pressure Amazon and other e-book retailers to accept the new model. They also agreed to pay Apple a 30 percent commission for each e-book purchased through Apple’s iBookstore and promised, through a retail price-matching most favored nation (MFN) provision, that no other e-book retailer would sell an e-book title at a lower price than Apple. Judge Cote ultimately concluded that the plan ranread more

The post Apple Loses First Round of E-Book Lawsuit appeared first on businesslawnews.com.

Will Apple Antitrust Lawsuit Change the Landscape of the E-Book Business?
Posted on Friday April 27, 2012

Business attorney NYCThe U.S. Department of Justice has filed an antitrust lawsuit in New York against Apple Inc. and several leading publishers, alleging that their stifling of retail price competition resulted in consumers paying millions of dollars more for their e-books. The lawsuit highlights that what might be considered a keen “business decision” could be characterized as anti-competitive by the government and lead to a potentially costly antitrust lawsuit. In this case, the Justice Department contends that the CEOs of Hachette Book Group, HarperCollins Publishers, Macmillan, The Penguin Group, and Simon & Schuster met regularly to discuss how to prevent Amazon.com from offering steep discounts on electronic versions of their books. “Publishers saw the rise in e-books, and particularly Amazon's price discounting, as a substantial challenge to their traditional business model," reads the complaint. "The Publisher Defendants feared that lower retail prices for e-books might lead eventually to lower wholesale prices for e-books, lower prices for print books, or other consequences the publishers hoped to avoid," it further states. To protect profits, the five publishers allegedly reached an arrangement with Apple that increased the price of many best-selling e-books to $12.99 or $14.99. The agreement involved shifting from traditional wholesale pricing—where retailers set the price of both digital and physical books—to an agency model under which publishers establish e-book prices and retailers receive a commission. The publishers then worked together to pressure Amazon and other e-book retailers to accept the new model, according to the DOJ. "Our goal is to force Amazon to return to acceptable salesread more

The post Will Apple Antitrust Lawsuit Change the Landscape of the E-Book Business? appeared first on businesslawnews.com.

  View All

Read more

Affiliations

New Jersey State Bar Association (Environmental Law Section)

American Bar Association [Member of the Natural Resources, Energy and Environmental Law Section (Special Committees on Environmental Transactions, Audits and Brownfields, and Solid Waste) and Business Law Section (Special Committees on Negotiated Acquisitions and Environmental Controls)]

Read more