Sherwin-Williams Co., DuPont Co. and other former makers of lead paint Friday won dismissal of a lawsuit filed by New Jersey communities whose officials contend that the companies’ products endanger public health.
Twenty-six cities, towns and counties had filed suit under public-nuisance law, seeking millions of dollars to remove the paint from homes, schools and public buildings, Bloomberg News said. But the N.J. Supreme Court ruled 4 to 2 that state law did not permit them to do so.
“Were we to find a cause of action here, nuisance law would become a monster,” the court said Friday in a 71-page opinion. “The conduct that has given rise to the public health crisis is, in point of fact, poor maintenance of premises,” the court declared, echoing paintmakers’ comments.
“These companies are not responsible for risks today from poorly maintained lead paint,” said Bonnie Campbell, a former Iowa attorney general serving as spokeswoman for the paintmakers, who applauded the court for “rejecting the distortion of public nuisance law.”
Public-nuisance law was at the heart of Rhode Island’s February 2006 victory over Sherwin-Williams, NL Industries and Millenium, who may face bills of $3.7 billion or more for abating lead-contaminated buildings across the state. (READ MORE) The manufacturers have appealed that ruling to the R.I. Supreme Court.
New Jersey was the second state in a week to reject such public-nuisance lawsuits against lead-paint makers. The Missouri Supreme Court had ruled earlier last week that nuisance law could not be used by St. Louis officials to recoup the cost of removing or covering up aging paint.
“It’s a very unfortunate day for the lead-poisoned children in New Jersey,” Fidelma Fitzpatrick, a lawyer for the N.J. communities in “In Re Lead Paint Litigation, A-73-05, N.J. Supreme Court (Trenton),” said on Friday. “Children will continue to live with this poison in their homes while the companies that put it there will continue to turn their backs on the kids.”
