Update on Contaminated Wells

The Scranton times has printed another article on the contaminated wells in North Abington Township which can be found here. The information, however, is largely redundant to that contained in the article below.

Lawsuit Filed Over Contaminated Wells

A Lawsuit was filed last week by Wright & Reihner P.C. on behalf of six homeowners over the contamination of wells found in an area stretching over four townships more than one and half miles from the Ivy Industrial Part in North Abington. So far levels of both trichloroethylene (TCE) and tetrachloroethylene (PCE) have been found to be well over the acceptable federal standard in more than 50 commercial and residential wells in the area. In some case the levels of PCE were more than 30 times higher than the acceptable level.

The suit names Metso Paper USA, Sandvik, Sandvik Extruded Tube, Inc., and Sandvik’s environmental plant manager, Larry Snell, as defendants. It comes on the heels of two class-action lawsuits that have been filed over the contamination. Metso is named as a defendant in both lawsuits, while Sandvik is named in just one of the cases.

Metso Paper officials were aware of TCE and PCE contamination in shallow groundwater monitoring wells as early as August 2002, according to information released by DEP. The common solvents are typically used to degrease metal. Meanwhile, Sandvik, the other potentially responsible party, also had a prior run-in with the two solvents. The steel tube and pipe manufacturer discovered TCE and PCE more than five years ago during excavation work, according to a report sent to DEP in March 2000, more than five before public notice was given by the DEP last August.

The pressing questions remain, first, why the two companies were not compelled by the DEP to take immediate action to reduce or eliminate levels of chemicals that were seeping into area wells? And secondly - and perhaps even more alarming - why were area residents nore notified by the DEP earlier that it was possible they were drinking contaminated water? The Scranton Time has quoted State Representative Gaynor Cawley's response to the issue:

I would much rather they panicked in January, and by now they would have at least had an assurance that action has been taken if their water is safe or is not safe,” said Mr. Cawley. I would have notified those homeowners immediately, at least to say, ‘Don't drink your water until you'’re tested. I'’m not happy at all.”

Many residents and officials, meanwhile, simply want to know: What harm would a heads-up have rendered, even one littered with uncertainties?

Metso Paper never formally entered the voluntary Act 2 program, which releases property owners from liability if they clean up contamination. But both Metso and the DEP proceeded as if the company had, and conducted more sampling and a site review, though it is unclear that action was taken to reduce levels of the emitted into the local enviornment.

Under the Act 2 program, public notification comes once a property owner formally agrees to enter, filing a notice for intent to remediate. But beyond specific programs like Act 2, the environmental department doesn't have specific statutes governing public notification in situations like the Ivy Industrial Park.

Additionally both companies may be found to have been in violation of the Clean Streams Law, a statute which requires the person spilling the substance or the person owning the premises from which the substance is spilled to alert the environmental department immediately.

You can read more from the Scranton Times coverage of the situation here. Additionally, check back to this website as O'Malley and Langan will be keeping a close eye on the legal side of this issue as it develops.

O'Malley and Langan Join In Lawsuit

1,492 workers have joined in a class action lawsuit filed against home improvement giant Lowe's.

Over 1,400 current and former Lowe's employees in Ohio are taking steps to secure payment of increased overtime wages. Jason Smith, a former Department Manager at Lowe's Bellefontaine, Ohio store and nine other former Lowe's employees, originally filed suit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, alleging the home improvement giant failed to properly pay him and other salaried employees overtime wages in violation of the federal Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA") and the Ohio Minimum Wage Act ("OMWA").

Smith's lawsuit is a class action on behalf of other department managers, assistant department managers and specialists and is presently being litigated in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio in Columbus, under the caption Jason Smith, et al. v. Lowe's Home Centers, Inc., No. 2:04-CV-774(S.D. OHIO). The case is assigned to United States District Judge Gregory Frost.

On May 11, 2005, Judge Frost issued a Decision and Order granting ten former Lowe's employees the right to contact current and former Ohio Lowe's employees to see if they want to join the lawsuit. As of September 2, 2005, 1,492 individuals have joined the lawsuit. The current and former Lowe's employees are represented by a team of law firms headed by the Columbus, Ohio law firm of Barkan and Neff.

"We're pleased that so many Ohio workers have filed federal court forms joining this lawsuit. This response in a great kick-off to the Labor Day weekend, and we feel honored to fight for the rights of so many Ohio workers and their families," said Robert E. DeRose, Esq. of Barkan and Neff.

Lowe's has been operating its home improvement stores for more than 58 years and currently has more than 975 stores in forty-five states. Similar overtime lawsuits have been filed against Lowe's in several other states, including Pennsylvania, Florida, Kansas, and a nation-wide class action lawsuit in New York.

For more information regarding the litigation, or copies of pleadings filed with the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, contact Robert DeRose, Barkan and Neff, (614) 221-4221.

PriceWaterhouseCoopers Study Shows PA Medical Malpractice Costs are Down

Pennsylvania medical malpractice costs are down 5-8% according to a recent study by PriceWaterhouseCooper, reports the Pittsburg Business Times.

"The findings are from a study completed by PriceWaterhouseCoopers, state Sen. Michael Stack, D-Philadelphia, and Sen. Jay Costa Jr., D-Allegheny, said.

According to the study, most of the reductions resulted from the state banning venue shopping, requiring a certificate of merit, and reducing the mandatory coverage limit from $1.2 million to $1 million. The full impact of 2002's Act 13 Medical Care Availability and Reduction of Error Act will not be seen for several years, the study emphasized."

Just more good reason for rejecting budget caps and tort "reform" in Pennsylvania. Stay tuned for a larger post evaluating the "Medical Malpractice Tort Crisis."