Court Ruling Seen As Victory For Defendants In Lead Litigation
A New York state appeals court has unanimously reversed a decision that allowed plaintiffs in a lead-based paint poisoning case to seek damages under the so-called "market share" theory of liability.
WASHINGTON - A New York state appeals court has unanimously reversed a decision by a state judge in Buffalo that had allowed plaintiffs in a lead-based paint poisoning case to pursue their argument that companies can be held liable for damages under the so-called "market share" theory of liability. The ruling, seen as a victory for defendants in such cases, reverses a lower-court decision that companies can be held liable for any damages caused by use of a product manufactured within a given time period, according to those companies' proportionate share of the market at that time.
"This rational decision is a welcome pail of water thrown on one of the fires that have been set by plaintiffs' attorneys, whose chance of success is predicated on courts' willingness to adopt novel and unfounded theories of liability and recovery," said Tom Graves, vice president and general counsel of the National Paint & Coatings Association.