4 ms·

What a sad world. We have pretty reasonable judge with an reasonable verdict that seems obviously right but you can be sure there is automatically a bunch of la

by aluhut 11y ago

What a sad world. We have pretty reasonable judge with an reasonable verdict that seems obviously right but you can be sure there is automatically a bunch of lawyers looking for loopholes to crash it all and make money on it. Sometimes I have the feeling like the whole judicial apparatus has gone from solving real life problems to creating absurd problems that allow you to sue somebody.

rayiner 11y ago
Like everything in life, there are two sides of the coin. When I was in law school, I worked with a small town in central Illinois that Big Chemical Co. had left polluted with heavy metals after a decades-long mining operation. Making headway in the lawsuit was extremely difficult because of all the legal barriers put in place to protect defendants. The legal system has become very unfriendly to plaintiffs over the last 20-30 years and it's affecting a lot of legitimate cases.
- toomuchtodo 11y ago
  Why would the EPA not be taking that case? And extract a financial penalty for Superfund cleanup?
  - rayiner 11y ago
    EPA and state departments of environmental protection have limited resources to take on these cases, prove them up, and follow-through over the years it takes to do cleanup. In our case, Illinois EPA actually entered into a consent decree with defendants regarding the site, and defendants argued that the consent decree preempted our common law clams. But IEPA pretty much ignored enforcement for 15+ years. So we were stuck in a situation where enforcement power had been shifted from the courts to the agency, but the agency wasn't interested in acting.[1] What ultimately happened was that regime change happened at IEPA and they got serious about enforcing the consent decree. But that still doesn't compensate the townspeople. Good luck getting someone to buy your house in a former superfund site, even if the heavy metals on the school grounds have been cleaned up to a reasonable, cost-effective standard. [1] This problem is recurring. Agency enforcement is a lot more efficient than lawsuits. But agencies only have the resources to go after the biggest fish for the most egregious violations. And they're far more susceptible to political pressure ("you can't sue XYZ, they have 10,000 jobs in our state!")
    - toomuchtodo 11y ago
      Thanks for taking the time to respond, I appreciate it.

by aluhut 11y ago

rayiner 11y ago

Like everything in life, there are two sides of the coin. When I was in law school, I worked with a small town in central Illinois that Big Chemical Co. had left polluted with heavy metals after a decades-long mining operation. Making headway in the lawsuit was extremely difficult because of all the legal barriers put in place to protect defendants. The legal system has become very unfriendly to plaintiffs over the last 20-30 years and it's affecting a lot of legitimate cases.

toomuchtodo 11y ago
Why would the EPA not be taking that case? And extract a financial penalty for Superfund cleanup?
- rayiner 11y ago
  EPA and state departments of environmental protection have limited resources to take on these cases, prove them up, and follow-through over the years it takes to do cleanup. In our case, Illinois EPA actually entered into a consent decree with defendants regarding the site, and defendants argued that the consent decree preempted our common law clams. But IEPA pretty much ignored enforcement for 15+ years. So we were stuck in a situation where enforcement power had been shifted from the courts to the agency, but the agency wasn't interested in acting.[1] What ultimately happened was that regime change happened at IEPA and they got serious about enforcing the consent decree. But that still doesn't compensate the townspeople. Good luck getting someone to buy your house in a former superfund site, even if the heavy metals on the school grounds have been cleaned up to a reasonable, cost-effective standard. [1] This problem is recurring. Agency enforcement is a lot more efficient than lawsuits. But agencies only have the resources to go after the biggest fish for the most egregious violations. And they're far more susceptible to political pressure ("you can't sue XYZ, they have 10,000 jobs in our state!")
  - toomuchtodo 11y ago
    Thanks for taking the time to respond, I appreciate it.