Sherwin-Williams Slams DuPont Agreement, Premature Abatement Process in RI Lead Paint Litigation

In a stunning departure from its low-profile public relations stance, Sherwin-Williams filed two high-profile motions yesterday relating to the Rhode Island lead paint public nuisance litigation. 

As reported by John O'Brien in LEGAL NEWSLINE, one concerns the controversial DuPont "agreement" which allowed that firm to get out of being a defendant in the RI Lead Paint Trial II.  The other focuses on staying the lead paint abatement process.

DuPont:

O'Brien states, "Sherwin-Williams is requesting that two portions of DuPont's settlement with the State [RI] be removed because they only serve [RI Attorney General] Lynch's interests." One is the $2.5 million for Boston's Brigham and Women's Hospital.  Sherwin-Williams claims that those funds are being applied to satisfy a pledge made by Motley Rice [the plaintiff firm hired on contingency to assist Lynch with RI II].  The other is $1 million to Brown University which is Lynch's alma mater.

Specifically, reports O'Brien, the motion states, "There is absolutely no basis in the law for an Attorney General to sue in the name of the State and then cut a deal whereby settlement money from the case is diverted to third parties, particularly an out-of-state third party."

Lead Paint Abatement Process:

For the abatement part of the verdict in favor of the state in RI II, Lynch recently proposed a $2.4 billion plan.  O'Brien reports that Sherwin-Williams "is attempting to stay [that] until another company, Cyanamid, has its trial.  Only then, Sherwin-Williams says, will each company know what it must contribute to the abatement process."

Specifically, says O'Brien, this motion indicates, "The liability of the remaining defendant must be resolved by a jury before a remedy phase can properly begin."

****************************************************************************************************************

Has this shift in Sherwin-Williams positioning resulted from its recent victories in several state Supreme Courts, NL Industries' victory in City of Milwaukee vs NL Industries, and the dropping of all but one count in "Thomas?"