Product Liability -- 2017



California v. Conagra Grocery Products Co.   (Cal. Ct. App.)

Validity of public nuisance claims

The NAM filed an amicus brief in the California Court of Appeals supporting lead pigment manufacturers against lawsuits by ten California cities and counties alleging that lead paint is a “public nuisance” and therefore the manufacturers are liable for all remediation costs to remove lead paint in those counties. This case could expand the law of public nuisance bringing uncertainty to manufacturers and opening the door to litigation against any industry with a malleable standard for the tort of public nuisance. The NAM’s brief explained that the trial court’s decision 1) expanded the law of public nuisance and stripped away traditional product liability elements and defenses; 2) watered down the government’s burden of proof by allowing suits against companies based solely on the fact that the products had foreseeable risks of harm; and 3) flew against public policy by allowing California governments to bring public nuisance based on private harms. Unfortunately, the Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s ruling and held that the companies were liable for remediation, but limited remediation to houses built before 1951.