Paint makers fight a $2.5B ruling over lead hazard

I was going to try entitle a post today, “Silly Sunday.” The intention was for a post that was beyond the pale of reason with a sprinkle of humor thrown in. Weekends can be tough for bloggers. Hard to get the energy up and be at the ready. This is definitely qualifies as beyond the pale. But the significance could be enormous. Think about it. There has been no lead paint in homes since 1978. Yet this could set a precedent that would ensure the bankruptcy of many major companies.  $2.5 Billion for California alone. And if required across the United States? Kiss these companies good-bye. It never ends.

Paint makers try to avoid $2.5B ruling over lead hazard

  • Lawyers for house-paint providers are due to make their final arguments today in a trial over whether the companies should have to remove lead paint from hundreds of thousands of homes in California, a requirement that could cost the firms up to $2.5B.
  • The defendants are Sherwin-Williams (SHW) NL Industries (NL), ConAgra (CAG), DuPont (DD) and BP (BP) unit Atlantic-Richfield.
  • The case has been brought by 10 city and county governments in California, which argue that the lead is harmful to children. Lead has been banned in residential paint since 1978. Seeking Alpha
%d bloggers like this: