(January 9, 2012) A California Chamber of Commerce-opposed bill that will increase unjust litigation will be considered by the Assembly Judiciary Committee tomorrow.
AB 1207 (Furutani; D-South Los Angeles) increases litigation exposure for property owners, developers, contractors, architects, engineers and other service providers by removing the statute of limitations for civil claims related to exposure to a pollutant or hazardous substance.
Statute of Limitations
The statute of limitations defines the period of time by which a potential plaintiff must file a claim after incurring harm. After the “statute has run,” or the time period has passed, no lawsuit may be brought. The statute of limitations provides certainty and notice to both plaintiffs and defendants about their obligations, duties and remedies under the law.
The Code of Civil Procedure sets a variety of time limits depending on the allegation. The code section this bill would amend sets an outside limit on property defect claims that are less easily discovered in order to provide certainty and encourage construction in the state.
AB 1207 removes this outside limitation and thereby expands the statute of limitations on personal or real property lawsuits when there was an allegation of exposure to a hazardous material, even if it was in relation to remediation activities. As a result, AB 1207 unnecessarily exposes a large number of industries to increased unjustified liability that may even lead to possible bankruptcy.
Existing Law
Federal and state law already provides an extensive and interwoven framework to hold companies responsible and mitigate actions that result in pollution or hazardous waste. Current law allows enforcement actions through both governmental prosecutors and in some cases even through private citizen lawsuits.
In addition to the private citizen lawsuits that may be brought under the myriad of federal and state environmental laws, injured plaintiffs may sue under other existing theories, such as negligence, strict liability, nuisance or trespass. Significantly, the statute of limitations does not stop a lawsuit if the pollution is willful or knowingly caused or if the defendant is found to have had control of the land.
Dangerous and Unnecessary
Injured plaintiffs in California have a wealth of legal options to use to seek redress. There is no need to further extend the statute of limitations for certain torts. This bill is both dangerous and unnecessary.
At a time when California’s economy is struggling to recover and when the state needs jobs, such an unjustified increased liability on businesses and governments is ill-advised.
Action Needed
AB 1207 will be heard in Assembly Judiciary on January 10. Contact your Assembly representatives and urge them to oppose AB 1207.
Staff Contact: Mira Guertin