3 Companies Reach $305M Deal to Settle Calif. Counties' Lead Paint Suits
The deal is a little more than a quarter the amount of the initial $1.15 billion 2014 judgment in the long-running nuisance litigation brought by 10 local governments in California.
July 17, 2019 at 04:34 PM
4 minute read
A group of California counties has struck a $305 million deal to end nearly two decades of litigation seeking to hold three companies liable for cleaning up lead paint in the state's older housing stock.
Lawyers for 10 local governments and the companies—The Sherwin-Williams Co., ConAgra Grocery Products Co. and NL Industries Inc.—filed court papers Wednesday indicating that each of the companies had agreed to pay a third of the settlement. The total is a little more than a quarter of the amount of the initial $1.15 billion judgment handed down in 2014 by now-retired Santa Clara Superior Court Judge James Kleinberg and less than the $409 million judgment entered Judge Thomas Kuhnle post-appeal.
Justin Berger of Cotchett, Pitre & McCarthy, who represented the government plaintiffs, said that settlement will allow his clients to do things such as removing lead paint from the exterior of contaminated houses and extend abatement programs past a four-year time limit that would have been in effect under Kuhnle's judgment. He also noted that the judgment still faced further potential appellate challenges, where the settlement funds will start to be paid in the coming months.
“This $305 million gives the jurisdictions much more flexibility as far as what they spend the money on and designing programs that most sufficiently and effectively address the lead paint problem,” Berger said.
Santa Clara County launched the litigation in 2000 claiming the companies endangered the state's residents through exposure to products containing lead, which they promoted as safe going back 70 years. The California Court of Appeal largely upheld Kleinberg's judgment in 2017, but limited the company's liability for abatement costs to homes built before 1951. Both the California Supreme Court and the U.S. Supreme Court declined to take up the companies' further appeals.
Mike Cummins, a spokesman for Conagra, said in a statement Wednesday that the company was pleased to put nearly 20 years of litigation behind it. “This ensures that our focus will remain where it should be—on making great food and driving shareholder value,” Cummins said. The company was represented by counsel at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom.
Andre Pauka of Bartlit Beck, which represents NL Industries, said that although his client continues to deny liability, “NL looks forward to bringing this decades-long litigation to an end.” The company had additional counsel from McManis Faulkner.
David Kiernan of Jones Day, which represents Sherwin-Williams, didn't immediately respond to an email Monday.
The plaintiffs team also included counsel from Motley Rice, Mary Alexander & Associates and the Law Offices of Peter Earle, along with county counsels and city attorneys from Alameda County, Los Angeles County, Monterey County, city of Oakland, city of San Diego, city and county of San Francisco, San Mateo County, Santa Clara County, Solano County and Ventura County.
Berger said Wednesday that the private plaintiffs' counsel will be paid a 17% contingency fee, or about $52 million. The California Supreme Court signed off on the contingency fee arrangement after an earlier challenge by the companies.
Berger also said that he had submitted evidence recently that from 2010 to 2015 about 7,000 new cases of lead poisoning were reported in the plaintiff jurisdictions each year.
“Sometimes people don't understand the magnitude of the problem,” Berger said. “This is a huge victory for California's most vulnerable kids, mostly low-income children of color.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllHershey's 'Bubble Yum' Hit With Consumer Class Action for Allegedly Containing 'Forever Chemicals'
Los Angeles Secures $35M Settlement From Monsanto in Water Contamination Lawsuit
Bonta, Environmental Groups Sue Exxon Mobil Over Plastic Recycling Claims
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1The Key Moves in the Reshuffling German Legal Market as 2025 Dawns
- 2Social Media Celebrities Clash in $100M Lawsuit
- 3Federal Judge Sets 2026 Admiralty Bench Trial in Baltimore Bridge Collapse Litigation
- 4Trump Media Accuses Purchaser Rep of Extortion, Harassment After Merger
- 5Judge Slashes $2M in Punitive Damages in Sober-Living Harassment Case
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250