The California Department of Health has reported that the workers' occupational exposure to lead continues to be a serious public health issue.
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query lead poisoning. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query lead poisoning. Sort by date Show all posts
Wednesday, February 15, 2017
Friday, April 8, 2016
NJ: The Lead Paint Poisoning Crisis Continues
 |
| Lead Paint (Photo credit: Wikipedia) |
Lead paint for decades has been a problem in New Jersey decaying housing for decades. The consequences have been the lead poisoning of children. Children are particularly vulnerable to the health hazard that results in neurological disorders. Recent attention is again focussed on the issue. Today's post is shared from northjersey.com.
"The state will nearly double its spending to $22 million on lead safety programs for children this year, Governor Christie said Tuesday, amid sustained calls for attention and money to an issue that has for years been largely hidden from public view.
Friday, October 25, 2013
U.S. National Lead Poisoning Prevention Week Goes Global
he U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), are partnering with the Global Alliance to Eliminate Lead Paint, to announce the Lead Poisoning Prevention Week of Action. This is the first time National Lead Poisoning Prevention Week will be recognized internationally. More than 35 countries from across the world will take action and hold public awareness activities during this week.“This year’s theme, ‘Lead-Free Kids for a Healthy Future,’ underscores the importance of testing your home for lead and understanding how to prevent harmful exposures. Given that lead impacts children around the world, we are pleased to help National Lead Poisoning Prevention Week go global this year,” said Jim Jones, EPA’s assistant administrator for the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention. “Joining with other countries to raise awareness about protecting children from the harmful exposure to lead will have a long-term positive effect on the health of children worldwide.” This year, the partners will work to raise awareness about lead paint poisoning worldwide and the need to eliminate lead in paint. The... |
Monday, September 2, 2013
Lead Paint Makers Could Face The Same Fate As Big Tobacco
A lawsuit in California that seeks some $1 billion from former lead paint manufacturers is far from the first attempt to hold the industry liable for decades of poisoning children and leaving lingering contamination.
But experts such as Richard Rabin -- who directed a lead poisoning registry at the Massachusetts Department of Labor for over 20 years -- think the case just might be the first to finally succeed, marking the end of a long losing streak. "My ideal hope is something along the lines of what happened with tobacco," said Rabin, who initiated the inaugural trial against the lead paint industry more than 25 years ago. "It's gone on and on and on," he said of lead litigation, even as research uncovering lead's dangers, "keeps coming and coming." After fending off lawsuits since the 1950s, the tables eventually turned on big tobacco, forcing the industry to pay out hundreds of billions of dollars in the late 1990s. At that point, it had become common knowledge that the industry was well aware of the addictive qualities and the health hazards of their products. In 1987, with nearly a century of documented dangers accumulated on childhood lead poisoning, a lawsuit -- spurred by Rabin -- was filed on behalf of a Boston girl exposed to lead paint as a toddler. "I want to be a lawyer, but I don't think I can do the studying,'' Monica Santiago told The New York Times in 1988, then 15 years old. ''In school they teach me, but I forget. The kids call me dumb. Sometimes when I do... |
….
Jon L. Gelman of Wayne NJ is the author NJ Workers’ Compensation Law (West-Thompson) and co-author of the national treatise, Modern Workers’ Compensation Law (West-Thompson). For over 4 decades the Law Offices of Jon L Gelman 1.973.696.7900 jon@gelmans.com have been representing injured workers and their families who have suffered occupational accidents and illnesses.
Related articles
- How the Paint Industry Escapes Responsibility for Lead Poisoning (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Coal Industry: The Next Target for a Major Lawsuit (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Lead Paint - Industry Has Yet to Meet Its Responsibility (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Plaintiffs' expert in lead paint trial says industry took responsibility for public health (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Sides rest in Calif. lead paint trial (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Lead paint manufacturers facing California challenge (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Lots of data to process for Calif. lead paint judge (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
Sunday, July 14, 2013
Lead Paint - Industry Has Yet to Meet Its Responsibility
Click here to see the entire video recording of the program: "Toxic Disinformation" aired on PBS May 17, 2013.
California Public Entity Lead Paint Lawsuit Trial Starts (Bloomberg 7.15.13)
Monday, July 28, 2014
Attorneys Who Won Landmark Lead Paint Judgment and Cleanup Named Public Justice Trial Lawyer of the Year
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. ... |
Friday, November 17, 2017
California Court of Appeal Upholds Landmark Ruling Affirming $1.5 Billion Judgment Ordering the Removal of Lead Paint From Pre-1951 Homes
After a seventeen year legal battle that broke new legal ground, California’s Sixth District Court of Appeal unanimously upheld a lower court decision ordering three lead paint manufacturers to clean up lead paint inside older homes in the County of Santa Clara and nine other California cities and counties. Today’s ruling holds defendants Sherwin-Williams Company, NL Industries, Inc., and ConAgra Grocery Products Company responsible for the public nuisance created by lead paint inside pre-1951 homes.
Wednesday, April 11, 2012
Company Faces Fine for Failing to Inform Residents about the Presence of Lead-based Paint and its Dangers
Lead paint at worksites remains a clear and present danger to workers. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has issued a complaint against CRM Rental Management, Inc. of Rome, N.Y. for not informing residents of its buildings about potential lead-based paint in their apartments.
It is estimated that three-quarters of U.S. residential dwellings built before 1978 contain some lead-based paint. Infants and young children are especially vulnerable to lead-based paint exposure, which can cause IQ deficiencies, reading and learning disabilities, impaired hearing, reduced attention spans, hyperactivity and behavioral problems. CRM Rental Management faces over $140,000 in potential fines for 43 instances in which the company failed to properly inform residents of four buildings in New Hartford and Rome, New York about the potential presence of lead-based paint.
“Lead paint is a serious threat to children’s health and disclosure can arm families with information they need to protect their kids,” said Judith A. Enck, EPA Regional Administrator. "Rental agents, property managers and building owners are required to follow EPA lead paint disclosure requirements and make sure people are aware of potential lead hazards in homes.”
Lead poisoning remains one of the most prevalent threats to children's well-being but it is also one of the most preventable. Under federal law, families have the right to know whether there are any potential lead-paint hazards in a prospective home, and must be informed about the harm lead can inflict on small children. Pregnant women and children younger than age six are among the most vulnerable to adverse health risks from lead-based paint.
EPA regulations require real estate management companies and property owners that sell or rent housing built before 1978 to provide renters or buyers with a form that contains a warning about the dangers of lead-based paint and discloses information about its presence. People renting or buying an apartment or home must verify that they received the required warning and disclosure information, including the EPA pamphlet, Protect Your Family from Lead in Your Home.Prospective purchasers have a 10-day opportunity to assess the property for risks for the presence of lead-based paint.
The complaint against CRM Rental Management alleges that the company failed to provide residents with lead-based paint warning and disclosure statements, making them aware of records or reports that would alert them to potential lead-based paint hazards, and secure required signatures verifying that the required information was received.
In collaboration with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Centers for Disease Control, EPA operates the National Lead Information Center, including a toll-free hotline that can be reached at 1-800-424-LEAD (5323).
For more information on lead and the risks posed by lead paint, visit: http://www.epa.gov/lead......
For over 3 decades the Law Offices of Jon L. Gelman 1.973.696.7900jon@gelmans.com have been representing injured workers and their families who have suffered work related accident and injuries.
It is estimated that three-quarters of U.S. residential dwellings built before 1978 contain some lead-based paint. Infants and young children are especially vulnerable to lead-based paint exposure, which can cause IQ deficiencies, reading and learning disabilities, impaired hearing, reduced attention spans, hyperactivity and behavioral problems. CRM Rental Management faces over $140,000 in potential fines for 43 instances in which the company failed to properly inform residents of four buildings in New Hartford and Rome, New York about the potential presence of lead-based paint.
“Lead paint is a serious threat to children’s health and disclosure can arm families with information they need to protect their kids,” said Judith A. Enck, EPA Regional Administrator. "Rental agents, property managers and building owners are required to follow EPA lead paint disclosure requirements and make sure people are aware of potential lead hazards in homes.”
Lead poisoning remains one of the most prevalent threats to children's well-being but it is also one of the most preventable. Under federal law, families have the right to know whether there are any potential lead-paint hazards in a prospective home, and must be informed about the harm lead can inflict on small children. Pregnant women and children younger than age six are among the most vulnerable to adverse health risks from lead-based paint.
EPA regulations require real estate management companies and property owners that sell or rent housing built before 1978 to provide renters or buyers with a form that contains a warning about the dangers of lead-based paint and discloses information about its presence. People renting or buying an apartment or home must verify that they received the required warning and disclosure information, including the EPA pamphlet, Protect Your Family from Lead in Your Home.Prospective purchasers have a 10-day opportunity to assess the property for risks for the presence of lead-based paint.
The complaint against CRM Rental Management alleges that the company failed to provide residents with lead-based paint warning and disclosure statements, making them aware of records or reports that would alert them to potential lead-based paint hazards, and secure required signatures verifying that the required information was received.
In collaboration with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Centers for Disease Control, EPA operates the National Lead Information Center, including a toll-free hotline that can be reached at 1-800-424-LEAD (5323).
For more information on lead and the risks posed by lead paint, visit: http://www.epa.gov/lead......
For over 3 decades the Law Offices of Jon L. Gelman 1.973.696.7900jon@gelmans.com have been representing injured workers and their families who have suffered work related accident and injuries.
Friday, May 27, 2016
Ohio gun shop's lead, respiratory hazards endanger workers - FIned $195K
Federal safety and health investigators found that employees of an Ohio gun shop may face life-long health damage because their employer continues to expose them tolead hazards and has failed to establish a respiratory protection program.
Thursday, April 17, 2014
EPA Enforcement Actions Against New England Painting Companies
Several recent settlements ensure that New England businesses performing painting and home renovation work are complying with requirements designed to protect children from exposure to lead-based paint during painting and other renovation activities. The settlements also contain financial penalties which must be paid for alleged violations of EPA’s Renovation, Repair and Painting (RRP) Rule.
EPA’s RRP Rule is designed to prevent exposure to lead-based paint and/or lead-based paint hazards, especially for children and infants. The rule requires individuals performing renovations for compensation at most pre-1978 housing and child-occupied facilities to be properly trained. There are certification and training requirements for individual renovators and firms performing renovations to ensure that safe work practices are followed during renovations.
“Infants’ and children’s developing bodies are especially vulnerable to the harmful effects of lead exposure, which can include lifelong impacts such as developmental impairment, learning disabilities, impaired hearing, reduced attention span, hyperactivity and behavioral problems,” said Curt Spalding, regional administrator of EPA’s New England office. “The common-sense and easy-to-follow safe work practices found in the RRP rule are designed to help ensure that people are protecting their kids from suffering serious, lifelong health impacts from lead exposure.”
EPA recently reached settlements in the following lead paint RRP cases:
East Coast Pros LLC, Norwalk, Conn. – This company was hired in 2012 to perform renovations at the First Congregational Church on the Green in Norwalk. The church facilities were built before 1978 and included the L’il Critters Preschool facility, with approximately 80 children below the age of 6 enrolled at the time the renovation was being performed. An EPA inspection indicated that the company started renovation work and disturbed more than 20 square feet of exterior painted surfaces without using lead-safe work practices. EPA identified six RRP Rule violations, including: failing to provide the EPA information pamphlet “Renovate Right” to the owner or adult occupants of the L’il Critters Preschool facility, which is a child-occupied facility; failing to provide the EPA information pamphlet “Renovate Right” to the parents/guardians of children at the L’il Critters Preschool facility; not maintaining any records regarding TSCA and RRP rule compliance; failing to have RRP firm certification; failing to ensure that the company’s renovators were RRP-certified; and failing to contain renovation waste. The company has agreed to an expedited settlement of $3,577.
Bill Vizzo Contractors, LLC/Michael’s Painting, Shelton, Conn. – This company will pay a penalty of $2,200 for failing to comply with lead-based paint renovation requirements during renovation work at a residence in Monroe, Conn., in violation of the Toxic Substances Control Act, the Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act, and the Renovation, Repair and Painting (RRP) Rule.
Gerard Therrien, Manchester, N.H. – Gerard Therrien performed painting and renovation work at a single family home in Manchester, N.H. During an inspection of the work, EPA identified RRP Rule violations, including: failing to properly cover the ground at the exterior of the building with plastic sheeting or other disposable impermeable material; failing to properly cover interior surfaces with taped-down plastic sheeting or other impermeable material; failing to contain waste from renovation activities to prevent releases of dust and debris; failing to obtain initial firm certification from EPA; failing to obtain a course completion certificate (proof of certification); failing to post signs clearly defining the work area at the work site. This matter was negotiated prior to filing an administrative action and Mr. Therrien agreed to pay a $2,980 penalty under EPA’s Pilot RRP Penalty Program for Micro-Businesses.
Collegiate Entrepreneurs, Inc., Braintree, Mass. – This corporation that specializes in renovating and painting apartment buildings and residences in Massachusetts and throughout New England paid a $30,000 penalty for alleged violations of the pre-renovation education and record keeping requirements of the Renovation Repair and Painting Rule. Their violations included failing to provide EPA’s lead hazard information pamphlet to customers before undertaking renovation projects in several Mass. communities, and failing to comply with the record-keeping requirements in connection with seven Mass. renovation projects during the summer of 2010.
EPA also recently announced settlements for alleged violations of the lead RRP rule for work to convert the former Frisbee School in Kittery, Maine into a community center. The companies involved were James J. Welch & Co., Inc., of Salem, Mass., hired as the primary contractor for the job, and New Hampshire Plate Glass Corp. of Portsmouth, N.H., which was hired as a subcontractor to install new replacement windows in the building. Under the settlements, JJ Welch will pay a penalty of $3,565, while NH Glass will pay a fine of $10,890.
EPA’s Renovation, Repair and Painting (RRP) Rule became effective on April 22, 2010 and allows for the assessment of penalties that may reach up to a maximum of $37,500 per violation per day.
Since 2012, EPA has pursued 14 actions in New England to enforce the RRP Rule. Continued enforcement of the lead paint Renovation, Repair and Painting Rule ensures both that children are being protected from avoidable exposure to lead, as well as there being a “level playing field” for contractors following the health-protective work practices in the regulation.
More information:
- Lead paint RRP Rule (http://www.epa.gov/lead/rrp/index.html)
- Why lead is a health hazard (http://www.epa.gov/lead/learn-about-lead.html)
Related Stories:
EPA’s RRP Rule is designed to prevent exposure to lead-based paint and/or lead-based paint hazards, especially for children and infants. The rule requires individuals performing renovations for compensation at most pre-1978 housing and child-occupied facilities to be properly trained. There are certification and training requirements for individual renovators and firms performing renovations to ensure that safe work practices are followed during renovations.
“Infants’ and children’s developing bodies are especially vulnerable to the harmful effects of lead exposure, which can include lifelong impacts such as developmental impairment, learning disabilities, impaired hearing, reduced attention span, hyperactivity and behavioral problems,” said Curt Spalding, regional administrator of EPA’s New England office. “The common-sense and easy-to-follow safe work practices found in the RRP rule are designed to help ensure that people are protecting their kids from suffering serious, lifelong health impacts from lead exposure.”
EPA recently reached settlements in the following lead paint RRP cases:
East Coast Pros LLC, Norwalk, Conn. – This company was hired in 2012 to perform renovations at the First Congregational Church on the Green in Norwalk. The church facilities were built before 1978 and included the L’il Critters Preschool facility, with approximately 80 children below the age of 6 enrolled at the time the renovation was being performed. An EPA inspection indicated that the company started renovation work and disturbed more than 20 square feet of exterior painted surfaces without using lead-safe work practices. EPA identified six RRP Rule violations, including: failing to provide the EPA information pamphlet “Renovate Right” to the owner or adult occupants of the L’il Critters Preschool facility, which is a child-occupied facility; failing to provide the EPA information pamphlet “Renovate Right” to the parents/guardians of children at the L’il Critters Preschool facility; not maintaining any records regarding TSCA and RRP rule compliance; failing to have RRP firm certification; failing to ensure that the company’s renovators were RRP-certified; and failing to contain renovation waste. The company has agreed to an expedited settlement of $3,577.
Bill Vizzo Contractors, LLC/Michael’s Painting, Shelton, Conn. – This company will pay a penalty of $2,200 for failing to comply with lead-based paint renovation requirements during renovation work at a residence in Monroe, Conn., in violation of the Toxic Substances Control Act, the Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act, and the Renovation, Repair and Painting (RRP) Rule.
Gerard Therrien, Manchester, N.H. – Gerard Therrien performed painting and renovation work at a single family home in Manchester, N.H. During an inspection of the work, EPA identified RRP Rule violations, including: failing to properly cover the ground at the exterior of the building with plastic sheeting or other disposable impermeable material; failing to properly cover interior surfaces with taped-down plastic sheeting or other impermeable material; failing to contain waste from renovation activities to prevent releases of dust and debris; failing to obtain initial firm certification from EPA; failing to obtain a course completion certificate (proof of certification); failing to post signs clearly defining the work area at the work site. This matter was negotiated prior to filing an administrative action and Mr. Therrien agreed to pay a $2,980 penalty under EPA’s Pilot RRP Penalty Program for Micro-Businesses.
Collegiate Entrepreneurs, Inc., Braintree, Mass. – This corporation that specializes in renovating and painting apartment buildings and residences in Massachusetts and throughout New England paid a $30,000 penalty for alleged violations of the pre-renovation education and record keeping requirements of the Renovation Repair and Painting Rule. Their violations included failing to provide EPA’s lead hazard information pamphlet to customers before undertaking renovation projects in several Mass. communities, and failing to comply with the record-keeping requirements in connection with seven Mass. renovation projects during the summer of 2010.
EPA also recently announced settlements for alleged violations of the lead RRP rule for work to convert the former Frisbee School in Kittery, Maine into a community center. The companies involved were James J. Welch & Co., Inc., of Salem, Mass., hired as the primary contractor for the job, and New Hampshire Plate Glass Corp. of Portsmouth, N.H., which was hired as a subcontractor to install new replacement windows in the building. Under the settlements, JJ Welch will pay a penalty of $3,565, while NH Glass will pay a fine of $10,890.
EPA’s Renovation, Repair and Painting (RRP) Rule became effective on April 22, 2010 and allows for the assessment of penalties that may reach up to a maximum of $37,500 per violation per day.
Since 2012, EPA has pursued 14 actions in New England to enforce the RRP Rule. Continued enforcement of the lead paint Renovation, Repair and Painting Rule ensures both that children are being protected from avoidable exposure to lead, as well as there being a “level playing field” for contractors following the health-protective work practices in the regulation.
More information:
- Lead paint RRP Rule (http://www.epa.gov/lead/rrp/index.html)
- Why lead is a health hazard (http://www.epa.gov/lead/learn-about-lead.html)
Related Stories:
Apr 09, 2014
BOSTON – In an effort to improve compliance with laws that protect children from lead paint poisoning, EPA is sending letters to approximately 200 home renovation and painting contractors, property management companies ...
Dec 17, 2013
In an historic ruling, a California Judge, held the lead paint pigment manufacturers liable for the damage they caused children by placing toxic lead pigment into paint. The companies will be held accountable for the ...
Dec 17, 2013
Lead paint manufacturers were held liable for creating a public nuisance. The Court ordered them to pay $1.1 Billion dollars in damages. The claim was prosecuted by a team of lawyers including those from Motley Rice LLC, ...
Dec 26, 2013
She has represented public entities in litigation against the lead paint industry including the multi-billion dollar Rhode Island trial. Fidelma Fitzpatrick is a nationally recognized advocate of children's and women's health issues ...
Wednesday, August 12, 2015
Lead: Bringing it Home From Work
NIOSH reports that homes may be contaminated by toxic substances such as lead when employees bring home the contaminates. Bystander exposure occurs when employees bring home toxic substances on their bodies, clothing or other objects. Lead affects the developing nervous system of children, and no safe blood lead level (BLL) in children has been identified:
Wednesday, October 17, 2018
SCOTUS Upholds California Supreme Court: Lead Paint Manufacturers Liable for Over $400 Million
The US Supreme Court declined to review a California Supreme Court decision holding multiple lead paint manufacturers responsible for cleanup costs amounting to over $400 million. The longstanding litigation was brought under the theory that lead paint contamination was a public nuisance. Lead paint has been known for decades as toxic.
Thursday, October 17, 2013
This Is Your Brain on Toxins
The need for regulation and responsibility is the focus of this very interesting article that appears in The New York Times today. Today's post is shared from nytimes.org
“Lead helps to guard your health.”  One boy, Sam, born in Milwaukee in 1990, “thrived as a baby,” according to his medical record. But then, as a toddler, he began to chew on lead paint or suck on fingers with lead dust, and his blood showed soaring lead levels. Sam’s family moved homes, but it was no use. At age 3, he was hospitalized for five days because of lead poisoning, and in kindergarten his teachers noticed that he had speech problems. He struggled through school, and doctors concluded that he had “permanent and irreversible” deficiencies in brain function. Sam’s story appears in “Lead Wars,” a book by Gerald Markowitz and David Rosner published this year that chronicles the monstrous irresponsibility of companies in the lead industry over the course of the 20th century. Eventually, over industry protests, came regulation and the removal of lead from gasoline. As a result, lead levels of American children have declined 90 percent... |
Thursday, December 26, 2013
Buffalo attorney had key role in lead-paint ruling
Fidelma Fitzpatrick is a seasoned trial attorney with the law firm of Motley Rice LLC. She is exceptionally skilled in both negotiated settlements and complex trial litigation. Fidelma assisted in crafted the historic multi-billion dollar tobacco settlement agreement between the US State Attorney Generals and the tobacco industry. She has represented public entities in litigation against the lead paint industry including the multi-billion dollar Rhode Island trial. Fidelma Fitzpatrick is a nationally recognized advocate of children's and women's health issues. Today's post is shared from the buffalonews.com.
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... |
Sunday, September 22, 2013
Closing arguments in Calif. lead paint trial take place Monday
 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... |
Related articles
- Plaintiffs in Calif. lead paint case say companies' witnesses were 'not persuasive' (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Sides rest in Calif. lead paint trial (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Plaintiffs' expert in lead paint trial says industry took responsibility for public health (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Lots of data to process for Calif. lead paint judge (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Calif. judge denies Sherwin Williams motion in lead paint trial (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Plaintiffs' expert says lead paint abatement could cost $1.4 billion (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Lead paint manufacturers facing California challenge (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
Friday, August 16, 2013
Coal Industry: The Next Target for a Major Lawsuit
The focus the past several weeks has been the lawsuit in California against the Lead Paint Industry. The lawsuit, pending for over a decade, was brought under the legal theory of "public nuisance." The case seeks to finally force the major suppliers of lead paint to the table to help in removing and correcting the alleged public and private health dangers the Industry created by marketing paint with lead pigment.
While the lead paint case is in its finals trial stages, a theory has emerged to litigate against the Coal Industry for its alleged acts that have damaged public health through crating industrial pollution.
"Coal industry executives ought to pay attention to the lead paint lawsuit currently happening in the California court system.
"Recently, a lawsuit was filed against the makers of lead paint, alleging that the industry knew about the toxicity of their product and yet still promoted it as “safe” to the public. The industry has faced many lawsuits over their products in the past, most of which were unsuccessful for the victims, due to the fact that the industry was often up front about the dangers of their products, and they funded public studies to determine the health effects.
"But things have changed in the American legal system, and attorneys are now taking a page out of the tobacco litigation playbook. By unearthing documents that detail the lead paint industry’s attempted cover-up of the dangers, they avoid the “buyer beware” caveat that the tobacco industry used for so long.
While the lead paint case is in its finals trial stages, a theory has emerged to litigate against the Coal Industry for its alleged acts that have damaged public health through crating industrial pollution.
"Coal industry executives ought to pay attention to the lead paint lawsuit currently happening in the California court system.
"Recently, a lawsuit was filed against the makers of lead paint, alleging that the industry knew about the toxicity of their product and yet still promoted it as “safe” to the public. The industry has faced many lawsuits over their products in the past, most of which were unsuccessful for the victims, due to the fact that the industry was often up front about the dangers of their products, and they funded public studies to determine the health effects.
"But things have changed in the American legal system, and attorneys are now taking a page out of the tobacco litigation playbook. By unearthing documents that detail the lead paint industry’s attempted cover-up of the dangers, they avoid the “buyer beware” caveat that the tobacco industry used for so long.
Friday, March 5, 2010
Alice in Wonderland - A Lesson in Occupational Illness
Alice in Wonderland has been released in the movie theaters today. The National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) has been quick to remind us of the Mad Hatter and mercury exposures.
"Society has made great progress in recognizing and controlling industrial hazards since Lewis Carroll's day. For example, nearly 70 years ago, on December 1, 1941, the U.S. Public Health Service ended mercury's use by hat manufacturers in 26 states through mutual agreements. The kinds of conditions that put hat-makers and other industrial workers at risk in 1865 are no longer tolerated," said John Howard, M.D., Director of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH).
"However," Dr. Howard emphasized, "the Hatter remains a cautionary figure, since exposures to mercury and other hazardous industrial substances can still occur in the workplace. Symptoms from chronic exposures to mercury, lead, and other neurotoxic substances, even at low levels, may be subtle in early stages. Sometimes, they may be mistaken for symptoms that can arise from other causes. Similar concerns exist about other adverse effects that are associated with exposures on the job. It is important to be vigilant about work-related illness, and to act decisively to protect workers' health."
In 1911, New Jersey adopted the Workers' Compensation Act. The original Act did not recognize any occupational diseases as compensable events. In 1924 there were early amendments to the Act which enumerated 9 diseases as compensable. Those disease were: anthrax, lead poisoning, mercury poisoning, arsenic, phosphorous, benzene, wood alcohol, chrome and caisson disease.
A utility man who was required to pour sixty pounds of mercury each day and who had mercury dust both on his face and his clothes developed muscular weakness. The expert doctor testified that the disease was either caused by mercury poisoning or myasthenia gravis. Even though his supervisor testified that daily showers were available to all employees, the treating doctor indicated that, as a result of positive clinical findings, diagnostic tests, and a history of exposure, the exposure was the cause of the petitioner's illness, namely muscular weakness, and was compensable. Jackson v. Mallinckrodt Chemical Works, 25 N.J.Misc. 33, 50 A.2d 106 (Com.Pl.1946).
A hatter who was required to come into contact with furs that had been treated with mercury was awarded total permanent disability benefits as a result of his having contracted the occupational disease of mercurial poisoning during the course of his employment. Horowitz v. Rothenberg Hat Co., 19 N.J.Misc. 284, 18 A.2d 852 (Dept. of Labor 1941), N.J.S.A. 34:15-31, L.1924, c. 124 (Sec. 1) 22b, p. 231.
An employee in the hat industry who had suffered from symptoms of mercury poisoning and who had notified the insurance carrier was deemed to have notified the employer as well, and compensation was allowed. Yurow v. Jersey Hat Corporation, 131 N.J.L. 265, 36 A.2d 296 (1944), judgment aff'd 132 N.J.L. 180, 39 A.2d 371 (Err. & App.1944).
The Division of Epidemiology, Environmental and Occupational Health Services requires that treating physicians report to the State Department of Health any occupational or environmental diseases within 30 days of diagnosis or treatment. These diseases include: lead toxicity, arsenic toxicity, mercury toxicity, cadmium toxicity and pesticide toxicity. N.J.A.C. 8:57-3.2.
...
Thursday, December 19, 2013
Ruling in California case may prompt new lawsuits over lead paint
| The recent $1.1 Billion judgment against the lead paint companies in California for creating a public nuisance may have widespread impact across the nation. Workers' hired to implement the remediation effort will have to be adequately educated concerning safety procedure to avoid lead poisoning. The today's post is share from kansascity.com . Paint makers could face a surge of lawsuits after a California state court judge ordered three companies to pay $1.1 billion to help government agencies get rid of lead from an estimated 5 million homes in the state. The ruling, while preliminary, was a rare loss for an industry that had turned back some 50 lawsuits filed nationwide over the last 25 years by public agencies seeking billions of dollars to remove lead-based paint from homes built before the federal government banned the product from the U.S. market in 1987. "The California ruling is certainly a significant development," said David Logan, a class action expert and dean of Roger Williams University Law in Rhode Island. "If it gets upheld, it will open a new path to victory for public agencies." Lisa Rickard, president of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's Institute for Legal Reform, predicted "a surge of frivolous lawsuits" because of Monday's ruling, which the industry plans to appeal. Exposure to lead is linked to learning disabilities and other health problems, especially among poor children living in older dwellings. The Centers for Disease Control... |
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... |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)