[net.politics.theory] Class Action Suits against Polluters

orb@whuxl.UUCP (SEVENER) (06/18/85)

> From Clayton Cramer: 
> Many states have prohibited class action lawsuits in air and water
> pollution cases "to keep from clogging up the courts".  The only case
> I can find of someone trying to file a class action lawsuit against an
> air polluter is Diamond vs. General Motors, et. al. (1971), where the
> judge refused to hear the case because it was too "complicated".  A
> judiciary that has the time and energy to hear the AT&T and IBM anti-trust
> suits, certainly has the time and energy to hear class action lawsuits.
> What's lacking is a clear-cut legal right to file class action lawsuits.
> 
 
Well, Libertarians should be happy to hear that the New Jersey PIRG
(Public Interest Research Group) just successfully won a class-action
suit against water polluters in New Jersey.  The State had refused
to prosecute the offenders but the law allowed public interest groups
to file class action lawsuits and collect the damages.
 
I see nothing wrong with such class action lawsuits if they are
effective in stopping pollution.
 
Libertarians should also be happy at the landmark decision which held
employers liable for murder in a case of cyanide poisoning due to
industrial neglect.
 
As Libertarians rejoice, I will bet funding from companies and industrialists
will dry up in no time!
                                      tim sevener  whuxl!orb

bob@islenet.UUCP (Bob Cunningham) (06/23/85)

> > Many states have prohibited class action lawsuits in air and water
> > pollution cases "to keep from clogging up the courts".

On the other hand, individual liability lawsuits have been known to clog
the courts.

There are now more than 700 individual lawsuits pending in federal and
state court here concerning Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard workers exposed to
lung-damaging asbestos over the last 40 years or so.

Roughly 200 of the lawsuits have been filed just recently -- since an $8.3
million judgement was rendered on behalf of Lawrence Kaowili.  Years ago,
when the suit was originally filed, he was alive.  He's since died of lung
cancer ... and obviously the jury thought that damage due to asbestos was
definitely a contributing factor.

Still, the lawsuits represent oly a small minority of the estimated 4
million people who have worked at Pearl Harbor during the last 40 years who
may have been exposed to asbestos.  More lawsuits will presumably continue
to be files.
-- 
Bob Cunningham  {dual|vortex|ihnp4}!islenet!bob
Honolulu, Hawaii

cramer@kontron.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) (06/25/85)

> > From Clayton Cramer: 
> > Many states have prohibited class action lawsuits in air and water
> > pollution cases "to keep from clogging up the courts".  The only case
> > I can find of someone trying to file a class action lawsuit against an
> > air polluter is Diamond vs. General Motors, et. al. (1971), where the
> > judge refused to hear the case because it was too "complicated".  A
> > judiciary that has the time and energy to hear the AT&T and IBM anti-trust
> > suits, certainly has the time and energy to hear class action lawsuits.
> > What's lacking is a clear-cut legal right to file class action lawsuits.
> > 
>  
> Well, Libertarians should be happy to hear that the New Jersey PIRG
> (Public Interest Research Group) just successfully won a class-action
> suit against water polluters in New Jersey.  The State had refused
> to prosecute the offenders but the law allowed public interest groups
> to file class action lawsuits and collect the damages.
>  
> I see nothing wrong with such class action lawsuits if they are
> effective in stopping pollution.
>  
Yes, I'm sure libertarians everywhere are pleased.

> Libertarians should also be happy at the landmark decision which held
> employers liable for murder in a case of cyanide poisoning due to
> industrial neglect.
>  
> As Libertarians rejoice, I will bet funding from companies and industrialists
> will dry up in no time!
>                                       tim sevener  whuxl!orb

I didn't read all the details in the case, but from what I have read,
it seems like a reasonable decision.

Mr. Sevener: funding for the libertarian movement has, with a few notable
exceptions, not come from companies and industrialists, most of whom are
scared spitless by a libertarian society, where they are responsible for
their actions.  The major exception to the rule I just mentioned is David
Koch, who contributed over two million dollars to the 1980 LP Presidential
campaign.  What's is industry?  Air pollution control equipment.  Mr.
Koch must either be ignoring his short-term interests, or figures that
a libertarian society will need more air pollution control equipment
than the current one (which is not a bad assumption).