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, alleging they
promoted the use of lead-based paint even though its dangers had been
known for many decades. Ten California cities and counties joined the
case seeking to hold country’s largest paint companies accountable. The
case went to trial in July.
The
companies, however, argued that they never deliberately sold a
hazardous product and relied on experts that did not determine the
levels of lead in their paints were a public health problem until they
were taken off the market in the 1970s.
Lead
is a powerful poison that is particularly harmful to the development of
young children, even at low levels. The government’s case stressed that
lead paint is widely considered to be the main cause of lead poisoning
for children who live in older housing.
Nearly
5 million homes in the cities and counties that sued were built before
the 1978 ban and could require abatement. Many are in low-income
neighborhoods.
“The
people who are affected are largely poor and minority children who live
in old homes that haven’t been repaired,” said Joseph Cotchett, an
attorney who represented the cities and counties who backed the lawsuit.
The ruling did not hold responsible two of the companies that were sued: Atlantic Richfield and DuPont.
http://touch.latimes.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-78579363/
No comments:
Post a Comment