PointofLaw.com

spacer FORUM FEATURED DISCUSSIONS PoL COLUMNS LEGAL EXPERTS ARTICLES BOOKS LINKS MASTHEAD ADVANCED SEARCH

FORUM

« A comment on medical malpractice insurance rates | Vioxx Class Action »

April 02, 2006


Rhode Island lead paint

The New York Times has the first detailed (albeit not detailed enough) inside look at the Rhode Island public-nuisance suit against paint manufacturers that stopped selling lead paint thirty years ago. Most states have rejected expansive public-nuisance theories that override all the limits of product-liability law, but the Rhode Island precedent could become a dangerous problem to the American economy in the future. The defendants are also challenging the practice of contracting out state lawsuits to contingency-fee attorneys. One new detail: DuPont's $12.5 million settlement provides no money to the plaintiffs' attorneys. (Julie Creswell, "The Nuisance That May Cost Billions", New York Times, Apr. 2).

Posted by Ted Frank at 04:05 PM | TrackBack (0)



categories:
Attorneys' Fees and Ethics
Products Liability









 

Published by the Manhattan Institute

The Manhattan Insitute's Center for Legal Policy.