May 19, 2008
R.I. Supreme Court: Lead paint ruling
Analysis of:
High-stakes lead paint case to R.I. Supreme Court | www.boston.com
This analysis is solely the work of the author. It has not been edited or endorsed by GLG.
Implications: Could the ultimate decision in this case open the flood gates to more favorable rulings for plaintiffs?Who should really bear the burden of proof in Lead Paint Litigation?
Analysis: Up until recently most lead paint cases ended in dismissal early in the lawsuit. The emerging public nuisance theory has allowed many cases to survive early dismissal and many to get as far as the appellate court. Is this Rhode Island case an anomaly? Similar lawsuits are pending in quite a few other States. How can a jury get to hear a lead paint case if there is really is no evidence how much of a specific companies' paint remains present in that state? Is the real ultimate outcome of this case cast in the original juries verdict in 2002? The recent oral arguments on this case with the extensive amount of creative materials in the briefs suggest an outcome that will be clearly undesirable to either side.
Analysis: Up until recently most lead paint cases ended in dismissal early in the lawsuit. The emerging public nuisance theory has allowed many cases to survive early dismissal and many to get as far as the appellate court. Is this Rhode Island case an anomaly? Similar lawsuits are pending in quite a few other States. How can a jury get to hear a lead paint case if there is really is no evidence how much of a specific companies' paint remains present in that state? Is the real ultimate outcome of this case cast in the original juries verdict in 2002? The recent oral arguments on this case with the extensive amount of creative materials in the briefs suggest an outcome that will be clearly undesirable to either side.
The true road map of what is to come and the possible actual numbers on cleanup has also been the subject of much debate. Despite the State's clean up plan there has been extensive investigation into what some seem is a more realistic remediation proposal. There are also many who are following this litigation that feel the looming reality is that just because landlords may not have the resources to clean up these sites does not mean the responsibility should fall with the paint manufacturers. Importantly, there are many reasons the jury came to its decision as well as the rationale behind the judge allowing the jury to hear certain evidence. The timing on the court's ruling has already sparked concern!
Report a Concern
More GLG News in
Legal, Economic & Regulatory Affairs
Most Popular:
Source Article | Expert Analyses
Partial settlement reached in Exxon Valdez case
www.dallasnews.com
Court Decision: Tiffany v. eBay
www1.nysd.uscourts.gov
U.S. trade commission loses bid for Rambus appeal
www.reuters.com
Decision: 20th Century Fox v. Cablevision
www.eff.org
Billions Not for the Plaintiffs Bar
www.law.com
Exxon Settles!
September 1, 2008
Rambus Wins Again
August 29, 2008
Does Cablevision Matter?
August 29, 2008
From eBay, the Law Should Expect More
August 29, 2008
Afghanistan: March Back Naked, the Ultimate Concessions: Theirs or Ours.
August 25, 2008