Legal Opinion

In Re Lead Paint Litigation

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Decided June 15, 2007PublishedCited by 93 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Hoens

In these consolidated complaints, twenty-six municipalities and counties seek to recover, from manufacturers and distributors of *409lead paints, the costs of detecting and removing lead paint from homes and buildings, of providing medical care to residents affected with lead poisoning, and of developing programs to educate residents about the dangers of lead paint. Although the complaints initially sought recovery through a wide variety of legal theories, we are called upon to consider only whether these plaintiffs have stated a cognizable claim based on the common law tort of public nuisance.…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. DiProspero v. PennSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2005
  2. Tioga Public School District 15 of Williams County, State of North Dakota v. United States Gypsum CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1993
  3. James v. Bessemer Processing Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1998
  4. MAYOR, & C., OF ALPINE BOROUGH v. BrewsterSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1951
  5. James v. Arms Technology, Inc.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2003

20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by93 opinions

  1. Bosland v. Warnock Dodge, Inc.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 2009
  2. Anthony D'agostino v. Ricardo Maldonado (068940)Supreme Court of New Jersey · 2013
  3. Borough of Upper Saddle River v. Rockland County Sewer District 1District Court, S.D. New York · 2014
  4. Allen v. v. AND a BROS., INC.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 2011
  5. State v. Lead Industries, Ass'n, Inc.Supreme Court of Rhode Island · 2008

88 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API