State of Rhode Island v. Lead Industries Association, Inc., et al.

NCLC filed twice in this case.

In 2005, concerned that the Rhode Island attorney general created a substantial conflict of interest, NCLC filed a brief with the Rhode Island Supreme Court describing in detail the troubling relationships between state attorneys general and private counsel which have undermined public confidence in the states' primary litigators. In doing so, NCLC carefully distinguished between contingency fee arrangements entered into by plaintiffs with limited resources and similar agreements entered into by states which, by the very nature of the public interest they serve, should be concerned with more than maximizing potential recovery.

In 2008, NCLC argued that a series of legal errors by the trial court produced a jury verdict holding manufacturers of lead pigment liable for creating a public nuisance in buildings throughout the state of Rhode Island. In its brief, NCLC maintained that the trial court’s rulings represented a vast departure from the foundational requirements of public nuisance law and create a new form of absolute liability.

In 2006, the Rhode Island Supreme Court declined to consider whether the use by the Rhode Island Attorney General of private counsel on a contingency fee basis violated the Constitutions of the United States and of Rhode Island.

Agreeing with NCLC in 2008, the Rhode Island Supreme Court joined a chorus of other courts to hold that the public nuisance doctrine cannot be used to hold manufacturers of lead pigment liable for the alleged presence of lead paint in buildings throughout the state.

Amicus brief regarding contingency fee arrangements filed 5/13/05. Decided 6/02/06. Amicus brief regarding public nuisance filed 1/31/08. Decided 7/1/08.