Blog

Filter By:
Sort By:

Tag: lead paint

October 16, 2018

When speech is a nuisance

Yesterday, the Supreme Court denied certiorari in Conagra v. State of California, a California state court decision holding that that three companies that lawfully sold lead paint are liable for creating a public nuisance and must therefore pay hundreds of millions of dollars into an "abatement" fund to investigate residential lead paint in the sta ...

August 18, 2018

Weekly litigation report — August 18, 2018

Opening day for SCOTUS nears as PLF readies to throw first pitch This week Pacific Legal Foundation filed its Reply Brief in Weyerhaeuser v. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, a case that arises from the Fifth Circuit and involves our client Edward Poitevent's property in the deep woods of Louisiana. The Supreme Court of the ...

November 18, 2017

Weekly litigation update — November 18, 2017

The U.S. Supreme Court will hear PLF's First Amendment challenge to political apparel ban, PLF presents oral argument on challenge to access regulation in the Ninth Circuit, and since the Feds get to regulate "species" and "subspecies," shouldn't we have an understandable definition of "species" and "subspecies"? ...

February 05, 2015

Can a legal, non-defective product be a public nuisance?

In the last decade, California was one of a group of states and cities that sued sellers and manufacturers of lead paint on the theory that those companies had contributed to a “public nuisance.” Public nuisance is a very vague term. Generally, it is defined as “an unreasonable interference with a right common to the ...