Category Archives: Public Nuisance

Defending Ecosystem Damage Claims: A Primer

William A. Ruskin's Toxic Tort Litigtion Blog Posted on by

Claims alleging natural resource or ecological damage are on the rise, but the standards governing the performance of ecological risk assessments are  not nearly as developed as the standards used for evaluating human health risks.  Consequently, the legal defenses to natural resource or ecological damage claims are not as well-developed as the defenses to claims of risk to human health.   Fortunately for the environmental defense bar, Carol M. Wood, a partner at King & Spalding; Judi L. Durda, a vice-president and toxicologist/ecologist at Integral Consulting; and Stephen Rahaim, chief environmental counsel at E.I. duPont de Nemours and Company, have written an excellent primer for navigating through … Continue reading →

Climate Change, Ecosystem Damage Claims and the Radicalization of the Court System

William A. Ruskin's Toxic Tort Litigtion Blog Posted on by

The use of the court system to address what is at its root  a political and social problem is not only misguided, but dangerous. I have discussed in prior articles the danger implicit in using public nuisance law to effect political change. California plaintiffs in the current climate change litigation are effectively blaming a handful of large industrial concerns for the evolution of our present-day civilization when the blame, if blame is even the appropriate term, should be collectively shared by countless other “responsible” parties.  At a time when USEPA is scrubbing from its website any and all references to climate change or global … Continue reading →

Using Public Nuisance Law To Effect A Political Outcome

William A. Ruskin's Toxic Tort Litigtion Blog Posted on by

The classic definition of public nuisance is “an unreasonable interference with right common to the general public” Camden County Bd. of Chosen Freeholders v. Beretta U.S.A. Corp., 273 F.3d 536, 539 (3d Cir.2001).  However, the utilization of public nuisance  theories in non-traditional product liability and environmental litigation, if given sustenance by the courts, threatens to generate multi-billion dollar exposure for corporate defendants. Remarkably, in many public nuisance cases, the defendant’s conduct  was proper and the product lawfully marketed and sold. It is partly for this reason that public nuisance has been described by various legal scholars and commentators as a “wilderness of law”, “an impenetrable … Continue reading →