The Missouri Supreme Court will consider whether six paint and pigment manufacturers must pay the costs of removing lead paint from St. Louis homes, even if the city can't prove who made the paint. The public-nuisance suit contends that although the city cannot identify the maker of any lead paint or pigment at abatement sites, it only needs to show that the companies substantially contributed to the city�s lead paint problem. The companies argue that product identification is needed to hold them liable.
January 05, 2007 at 12:00 AM
1 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.Com
The Missouri Supreme Court will consider whether paint manufacturers can be held accountable for costs to remove lead paint from St. Louis homes, even if the city can’t prove who made the paint.
Lead paint has been banned since 1978 because it can cause health problems and developmental disabilities in children. But thousands of older homes are contaminated with it. The city has estimated abatement costs in the millions of dollars.
Presented by BigVoodoo
Join the industry's top owners, investors, developers, brokers & financiers at THE MULTIFAMILY EVENT OF THE YEAR!
Law firms & in-house legal departments with a presence in the middle east celebrate outstanding achievement within the profession.
The premier educational and networking event for employee benefits brokers and agents.
Atlanta s John Marshall Law School is seeking to hire one or more full-time, visiting Legal WritingInstructors to teach Legal Research, Anal...
Lower Manhattan firm seeks a premises liability litigator (i.e., depositions, SJ motions, and/or trials) with at least 3-6 years of experien...
At NJM, a top-rated insurance company, we are seeking an Attorney on our Workers Compensation legal team with between 3 and 5 years of expe...
MELICK & PORTER, LLP PROMOTES CONNECTICUT PARTNERS HOLLY ROGERS, STEVEN BANKS, and ALEXANDER AHRENS
