This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.
Subscribe to the Daily Journal for access to Daily Appellate Reports, Verdicts, Judicial Profiles and more...
You have to be a subscriber to view this page.

Product Liability

Sep. 27, 2016

Nuisance lawsuits by local prosecutors: A dangerous game?

Recent lawsuits brought by local prosecutors using a public nuisance legal theory — the lead paint lawsuit, the opioid lawsuit and the Monsanto lawsuits — raise troubling questions of law and public policy. By Kim Stone

Kim Stone

President
California Civil Justice Association of California

See more...

By Kim Stone

Recent lawsuits brought by local prosecutors using a public nuisance legal theory - the lead paint lawsuit, the opioid lawsuit and the Monsanto lawsuits - raise troubling questions of law and public policy. Local jurisdictions are using public nuisance legal theory as a kind of super-tort to avoid traditional product liability law. They apply new law to lawful conduct that took place decades ago, rely on revisionist history, and seek ...

To continue reading, please subscribe.
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!

Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)

Already a subscriber?

Enewsletter Sign-up