The attorneys who successfully fought for lead paint cleanup in People of California v. Atlantic
The 27 attorneys won a $1.15 billion judgment against paint manufacturers last year, successfully arguing that lead paint in homes is a public nuisance that creates a quantifiable risk of harm to children who reside in or visit those homes. Leading the team of attorneys were (in alphabetical order) Mary E. Alexander of Mary Alexander & Associates, P.C. in San Francisco, Joseph W. Cotchett and Nancy L. Fineman of Cotchett, Pitre & McCarthy, LLP in Burlingame, Calif., Peter Earle of the Law Office of Peter Earle in Milwaukee, Wis., and Fidelma L. Fitzpatrick of the firm Motley Rice in Providence, R.I. “This is for the children of California,” Mary Alexander said upon accepting the award. Fidelma Fitzpatrick noted that her participation in People of California was the greatest privilege of her professional career. In California, tens of thousands of children each year have blood lead levels that exceed the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention threshold. There is virtual unanimity in the medical and scientific community that the primary cause of lead poisoning in children is the lead paint in their homes. It is also widely understood that the only way to prevent lead poisoning is to remove or remediate the paint in a child’s environment before a child gets poisoned. ... |
Copyright
(c) 2010-2025 Jon L Gelman, All Rights Reserved.
Showing posts with label Motley Rice. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Motley Rice. Show all posts
Monday, July 28, 2014
Attorneys Who Won Landmark Lead Paint Judgment and Cleanup Named Public Justice Trial Lawyer of the Year
Thursday, December 26, 2013
Buffalo attorney had key role in lead-paint ruling
A Buffalo attorney played a key role in a billion-dollar court decision last week in California.
Three lead-paint makers were ordered by Santa Clara Superior Court Judge James P. Kleinberg to create the $1.1 billion fund to protect children against lead paint produced decades earlier, despite knowing it endangered human health, especially for children. The verdict calls for the companies to put the money in a special health department fund dedicated to lead-poisoning prevention. The municipalities would then draw an allotted amount for use on lead inspections, repairs and removal effecting hundreds of thousands of homes. “From a public health standpoint, the decision is absolutely monumental. The good that this will bring to the children of California cannot be understated. Children today and future generations will be protected from lead poisoning because of it,” Fitzpatrick said. She has worked on the case for the South Carolina-based law firm Motley Rice for the past 13 years. In the bench trial, Kleinberg found Sherwin-Williams Co., NL Industries and ConAgra Grocery Products Co. guilty of creating a public nuisance by manufacturing and selling lead paint long after... |
Related articles
- Judge Orders Companies to Pay $1.1 Billion for Lead Paint Removal (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Stunning Loss for Lead Paint Makers in Lawsuit by California Cities and Counties (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Calif. judge wants paint companies to cover cost of lead removal (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Ruling in California case may prompt new lawsuits over lead paint (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- The Next Wave: N.H.L. Players Sue League Over Head Injuries (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Self-Promotion Watch: Lead and Crime in Postwar America (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- OSHA proposes more than $460,000 in fines against Long Island, NY, contractor for repeat fall and scaffolding hazards (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
Tuesday, December 17, 2013
Firms to pay $1.1-billion in long-running lead paint lawsuit
A Northern California judge Monday ordered three companies to pay $1.1 billion to remove lead-based paint from inside California homes, concluding a 13-year legal case.
Santa Clara County Superior Court Judge James P. Kleinberg ruled that ConAgra, NL Industries and Sherwin-Williams created a “public nuisance” by selling lead-based paint for decades before it was banned in 1978, finding them liable for exposing children to a known poison.
The opinion set aside $605 million, or 55% of the judgment, to pay for lead removal in Los Angeles County. The money will go into a fund administered by the state’s Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention Branch and will pay for inspections and lead abatement on the inside walls of tens of thousands of homes.
“The court is convinced there are thousands of California children in the Jurisdictions whose lives can be improved, if not saved through a lead abatement plan,” the judge’s ruling said.
Local governments sued major paint manufacturers in 2000,...
[Click here to see the rest of this post]
Click here to read the complete Decision. People v. Atlantic Richfield Company, et al.
Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara
Case No. 1-00-CV-788657
Related articles
- Plaintiffs' expert says lead paint abatement could cost $1.4 billion (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Occupational exposure to lead paint
- Lots of data to process for Calif. lead paint judge (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Judge again asks sides to settle in Calif. lead paint case (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- California cities seek $1 billion settlement for lead paint-related health care costs (publicintegrity.org)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)