(c) 2017 Jon L Gelman, All Rights Reserved.

Sunday, September 22, 2013

Closing arguments in Calif. lead paint trial take place Monday

Lead poisoning and lead expose is widespread. A vast number of cases of lead exposure flow from the lead pigment that was placed by the paint industry into paint. The residuals of the lead paint remain in place in many public and private buildings exposing both workers' and children to lead exposure and  the resulting lead disease. Today's post was shared by Legal Newsline and comes from


In the high stakes lead paint public nuisance case culminating in Santa Clara County Superior Court, both sides will make closing arguments Monday before Judge James Kleinberg.

The 10 city and county plaintiffs — Santa Clara County, San Francisco City, Alameda County, Los Angeles County, Monterey County, Oakland City, San Diego City, San Mateo County, Solano County and Ventura County — are expected to argue they have met a burden of proving their case by a preponderance of evidence.
Among other things, a team of attorneys for the plaintiffs will argue that the five defendant companies knew or should have known about the hazards created by the use of lead paint in homes, but promoted it anyway.

They seek abatement in approximately 500,000 pre-1978 built homes in the jurisdictions and estimate the cost at $1.6 billion for inspection and abatement if the public entities implement the program. Plaintiffs say it would cost $2.4 billion if implemented by the defendants.

Their plan calls for the creation of a fund administered by the public entities.
Defendant companies — Sherwin-Williams, NL Industries, ConAgra Grocery Products, DuPont and Atlantic Richfield Company — are expected to fiercely defend their position, saying plaintiffs did not meet a necessary test set forth by the state’s Sixth District Court of Appeal.
The paint companies will argue that the Sixth District allowed the 13-year-old case...
[Click here to see the rest of this post]