Tort Lawyers Criticize Budget Provision On Lead Paint Lawsuits

Lawyers are stepping up their attack on a provision in the state budget that will make it harder to sue lead paint producers.

The budget provision, now headed for a vote by both houses of the legislature, essentially enacts a law that failed to pass during the last session. Jeff Pitman of the Wisconsin Association for Justice says if passed, it would pull the rug out from under people who have already filed suits against paint companies whose products caused lead poisoning.

“You’re pursuing a case against a defendant, and all of a sudden a law is passed that says ‘Poof! You no longer have a claim.’ That’s basically what this modification in this product liability law language [says].”

Sen. Glen Grothman, R-West Bend, sponsored a similar bill that failed to pass last session. But he says he did not insert it in the current budget and is opposed to including policy items like this in the state budget bill. So far no senator has taken credit for putting it in the budget.

But Jim Murray, who represents paint companies who will be affected by the provision, says it will assure that companies only get sued for damages they are actually responsible for. Murray made his point during a committee hearing in January 2012.

“This law isn’t special private legislation intended only to benefit the paint companies. I hope it will inure to the benefit of all companies – that you can only be held responsible for something you actually did as we go forward from this date.”

This battle over tort law will now be fought again on the floor of the legislature as supporters try to keep it in the budget and opponents argue to have it removed.