PDA

View Full Version : The land of fruits-n-nuts, court case




tod evans
12-20-2013, 12:03 PM
"For the children" it's okay for this wacky judge to hold companies liable for making products that the government mandated...:confused:





California Judge Orders Lead-Paint Cleanup

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304173704579262851705350832

A California Superior Court judge in San Jose ordered three current or former paint companies to pay $1.1 billion into a fund to be used to clean up hazards from lead paint in hundreds of thousands of homes in the state.

The decision of Judge James Kleinberg, handed down Monday afternoon, requires payments by three defendants in the 13-year-old case: Sherwin-Williams Co. SHW +0.90% , NL Industries Inc. NL +2.26% and ConAgra Grocery Products Co. The judge dismissed two other defendants— DuPont Co. DD +0.22% and Atlantic-Richfield Co., owned by BP BP.LN +1.07% PLC—from the case. Under California law, the remaining defendants have 15 days to file objections to the decision, described as "proposed."

Bonnie J. Campbell, a spokeswoman for the three remaining defendants, said they would appeal the decision unless the judge agrees to hold a new trial or declare a mistrial. Ms. Campbell said the ruling "violates the federal and state constitutions by penalizing manufacturers for the truthful advertising of lawful products, done at a time when government officials routinely specified those products for use in residential buildings." She added: "The risks to children alleged today were unknown and unknowable decades ago."

Paint Makers Try to Hold Off Lead-Hazard Court Ruling 9/22/13
The lawsuit, filed by 10 city and county governments in California, sought a court order requiring the defendants—current or former makers or distributors of paint and pigments—to pay to remove lead-paint hazards from homes in Los Angeles County, San Franciso and other places whose local governments joined the legal action. The judge ordered the creation of a fund to achieve those aims. It is to be administered by California's existing state Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention Branch program.

Nancy Fineman, an attorney representing local government bodies who filed the suit, said the decision would have a "tremendous impact on the health and welfare of the children of California." She said Sherwin-Williams, NL and ConAgra would have to decide among themselves how to divide the $1.1 billion cost of the program.

The use of lead in residential paint has been banned in the U.S. since 1978 but it lies below layers of other paint and wall coverings in millions of homes. The cleanup plan doesn't require removal of all lead paint from homes. It does, however, require work to remove lead inside homes from such areas as window frames and doors where friction may release lead dust.

Makers of cigarettes and products containing asbestos have paid billions of dollars in damages to people hurt by those items. Until this decision, however, paint companies managed to defeat lawsuits blaming them for the health problems of people exposed to lead since 1978. Such suits had failed in Rhode Island, Missouri, Illinois, New Jersey and Wisconsin.

As a "bench trial," the California case didn't involve a jury. Motley Rice, a law firm that has reaped large fees in asbestos and tobacco litigation, advised the California plaintiffs on a contingency-fee basis.

The suit said lead paint can "severely and permanently" damage children's mental and physical development and alleges that the defendants promoted the use of lead paint despite knowing about the risks. The continuing presence of lead paint in and around houses has created a "public nuisance" under California's civil code, the suit argues.

The defendants argued that they couldn't have known 50 or more years ago the full risks of lead and that the use of lead paint began declining after the 1920s as knowledge of the hazards grew. In addition, they noted, old paint isn't the only source of lead risk to children; for example, gasoline containing lead, also now banned, left residues in soil.

Christopher Connor, chief executive officer of Sherwin-Williams, in July told analysts he was confident of defeating the California suit. He added that Sherwin-Williams hadn't created a reserve to pay for a possible court-ordered cleanup.

aGameOfThrones
12-20-2013, 01:36 PM
The suit said lead paint can "severely and permanently" damage children's mental and physical development and alleges that the defendants promoted the use of lead paint despite knowing about the risks. The continuing presence of lead paint in and around houses has created a "public nuisance" under California's civil code, the suit argues.


But this totally doesn't do that, eh judge? http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?435760-Police-Zip-Tie-5-year-old-and-charge-him-with-Battery-On-Officer