PROVIDENCE – The three former lead-paint makers who last month won a reversal of Rhode Island’s landmark verdict against them now are seeking reimbursement for their expenses in the case, according to the Associated Press.
In February 2006, a R.I. Superior Court jury found that lead paint that had accumulated on Rhode Island homes and public buildings in the decades before such pigments were banned constituted a public nuisance, and that Millennium Holdings LLC, NL Industries Inc. (formerly National Lead Co.) and The Sherwin-Williams Co. “were liable for causing or substantially contributing” to that nuisance and should be held responsible for the cost of abating the risk.
But on July 1, the R.I. Supreme Court unanimously rejected the lower-court verdict, ruling that the public-nuisance statute did not apply. (READ MORE)
The case dates back to 1999, when the state filed suit against several manufacturers and the nationwide Lead Industries Association Inc. After that initial lawsuit ended in a mistrial, when jurors were unable to reach a decision, the state immediately filed suit again. “That second trial, spanning four months, became the longest civil jury trial in the state’s history,” the high court justices noted in their verdict last month.
The Supreme Court’s action saved Millenium, NL Industries and Sherwin-Williams from having to underwrite the $2.4 billion estimated cost of abating lead-paint problems in homes and other buildings across the state. (READ MORE)
Now, the companies are also seeking to recoup part of the cost of their lengthy defense. On July 24, lawyers for the three manufacturers filed a request with Superior Court Judge Michael A. Silverstein, in which the companies seek more than $240,000 to cover their expenses for the court-appointed special master who evaluated cleanup plans, transcript fees and conference-call charges, the AP said.
The R.I. Attorney General’s office contends that the state’s sovereign immunity protects it against such claims.
The judge, who oversaw both the civil suit and the drafting of the R.I. Lead Nuisance Abatement Plan, has slated a hearing later this month.
Seifert Systems Invests in Energy Efficiency to Strengthen Operations
For manufacturers, energy is more than just another operating expense. It plays a critical role…
Learn More
Information about the lead-paint case (“State v. Lead Industries Association Inc. et al., No. 04-63”) – including the full opinion released by the R.I. Supreme Court on July 1 – is available at www.courts.ri.gov/supreme.
Additional information is available from the office of R.I. Attorney General Patrick C. Lynch at www.riag.ri.gov. Background information from the paint manufacturers is available at www.LeadLawsuits.com.
I believe the State should not be able to avoid responsibility in this case under the sovereign immunity concept or any other concept. This was a blatent attempt by the State to extract money from what they perceived to be deep pockets. The fact that in the process it would increase the cost of paint to all citizens was irrelevant to their thought process. Someone has to reign in the state and their “leaders” who seek more and more revenue for their pet projects and more and more revenue to “buy” votes from groups they wish to benefit.
The case had no scientific or legal merit. Children are not poisoned at 10-20 as proved by the fact that all children born between 1940-1965 had levels much higher without cognitive or IQ harm.
The attempt to skirt traditional product liablity avenues was “wacky” and devious and a calculated gamble by Whitehouse and successor to strike it rich. (And, by the way, to reward McConnell, a member of the Motley crew but also a prominent RI Democratic figure). It failed after 9 long years when the RISC unanimously informed the stubborn trial judge that it “should have been thrown out at the offset” (January 2000).
After the “victory” verdict, McConnell, with Lynch’s endorsement, filed for an initial reimbursement of $1.9M of their miscellaneous expenses by the defendants.
I think it proper, now that defeat has been snatched from the jaws of victory, that McConnell’s firm pay the same expenses they sought to extract from the defendants. They have deep pockets, lined with the tobacco settlement cash. These charges are chump change to such a prominent contingency lawyers’ firm. Remember “if we fail to win, you pay no fees or expenses”. The state may be protected (shame on Sheldon for his wreckless pitbull attack on an industry which was launched with knowledge of sovereign immunity) but the Motley crew are not so immunized. Let them pay all the expenses of the defendants which are in the tens of millions of dollars. Isn’t that what contingency means?
error:
should read “if we lose you pay no fees or expenses”.