Santa Clara County Superior Court Judge James Kleinberg on Monday ended proceedings in a 13-year-old case against paint companies by admonishing both sides, again, to settle. Kleinberg made his remarks after closing arguments in The People of California v. Atlantic Richfield Co. et. al., which seeks to hold five defendant paint companies liable for an alleged lead paint public nuisance in 10 county and municipal jurisdictions in the state. “Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence,” Kleinberg said, quoting John Adams who defended British soldiers in the Boston Massacre trial of 1770. Kleinberg also recalled a one-word response made by a judge in a civil case he tried as a lawyer. The judge, he said, asked the plaintiff’s lawyer how his clients felt about their prospects, to which the lawyer responded “Very confident.” “Why,” asked the judge. Kleinberg said the case settled a few days later. Saying it is “never too late to settle,” Kleinberg encouraged the sides to bring an end to the litigation that has spanned more than a decade and could put the defendants – Atlantic Richfield Co., ConAgra, DuPont, NL Industries and Sherwin Williams – on the hook for more than $1.4 billion to abate lead paint in pre 1978-built homes. Kleinberg said it takes He said it... |
Copyright
(c) 2010-2024 Jon L Gelman, All Rights Reserved.
Showing posts with label Kleinberg. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Kleinberg. Show all posts
Wednesday, September 25, 2013
Judge again asks sides to settle in Calif. lead paint case
Tuesday, September 24, 2013
Manufacturers Argue Against $1 Billion for Lead Paint
NL Industries Inc. is one of five paint companies that presented closing arguments against a public-nuisance lawsuit by 10 California cities and counties seeking more than $1 billion to replace or contain lead paint in millions of homes.
Superior Court Judge James Kleinberg in San Jose,California, interrupted closing arguments by Don Scott, a lawyer for NL Industries, who relied on studies by U.S .doctors to claim that the companies didn’t know about the potential forlead poisoning in children in the first half of the 20th century, as the counties and cities have claimed. Kleinberg, who is hearing the case, asked Scott about what he said was a “flat-out ban” of lead paint in Europe in the early 1900s, and a 1918 advertisement by Wilmington, Delaware-based DuPont Co. that “distinguished themselves away from lead paint.” “Is it your position that if the American doctors that you cite say X, that’s the end of the issue, and that the court should not be concerned with these other pieces of evidence that are undisputed?” Kleinberg asked. “I am troubled by the idea that because American doctors, fine people I’m sure they were,say XYZ that’s the end of the inquiry.” Scott replied that the laws in Europe were a “mixed bag”in which some countries banned lead paint earlier than others. ‘Prevailing Standard’“The fact is that on the question of what is pertinent tothis case, we’re looking at... |
Related articles
- Closing arguments in Calif. lead paint trial take place Monday (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Sides rest in Calif. lead paint trial (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Lots of data to process for Calif. lead paint judge (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Plaintiffs in Calif. lead paint case say companies' witnesses were 'not persuasive' (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Plaintiffs' expert says lead paint abatement could cost $1.4 billion (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Plaintiffs' expert in lead paint trial says industry took responsibility for public health (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)