Lead Paint Lawsuits: More on the Ohio AG’s Smart Move

By February 7, 2009Briefly Legal

More on the decision by Ohio Attorney General Richard Cordray to drop the state’s public nuisance suit against paint manufacturers.

Jane Genova at Law and More tells us what remains in the way of overreaching lawsuits that abuse the intent of public nuisance laws. Just one:

That’s the Santa Clara, California litigation against former lead paint companies such as Sherwin-Williams and ARCO. 

Currently, the contingency arrangement in that litigation is under review by the CA Supreme Court. The trial court had ruled against the use of contingency in complaints filed by government entities.  The CA appeals court ruled that contingency is acceptable if litigation is under the control of the government entity.  Here is that appeals court’s opinion H031540.

In Rhode Island and Milwaukee, Wisconsin, lead paint public nuisance lawsuits went to trial.  In both cases the defendants won.  In RI, the defendants won a motion for reimbursement by the plaintiff – that is the state of RI -of certain costs associated with the abatement Co-Examiner.  Here is that ruling from RI Superior Court Judge Michael Silverstein Download DOC.  It’s expected that was simply the first of a number of “invoices” for the winners in the litigation to seek compensation for certain expenses during the nine years that litigation took place.  

Political accountability.


Leave a Reply