Public Nuisance Expansion and Litigation

Lawyers pitch potential public nuisance lawsuits to government officials and others hoping to be hired on a contingency fee basis.

The Problem

Lawyers have expanded public nuisance legal theory such that merely selling an everyday product can create virtually unlimited liability, and they sue companies for allegedly causing various societal harms. Traditional public nuisances include a person’s use of land in a manner that creates local disturbances. Today’s public nuisance lawsuits have evolved far from the legal theory’s original intent, and now include: COVID-19, opioids, climate change, environmental and plastic cleanups, and e-cigarettes and vaping. 

ATRA’s Position

ATRA supports implementation of sunshine laws with regard to state and local governments’ hiring of outside contingency-fee attorneys as well as legislation that requires public nuisance lawsuits to be grounded in disputes over real property.

Search Through ATRA Reforms

Search through all of ATRA's reforms around Public Nuisance Expansion and Litigation

No related legislation or reform items found for this issue.



Public Nuisance Expansion and Litigation News and Press

Explore ATRA's most recent press releases and blogs around Public Nuisance Expansion and Litigation

State Tort Laws Negatively Impacting Economies Outlined for DOJ in ATRA Letter

Today, the American Tort Reform Association provided the Department of Jus...

ATRA Submits Comments to DOE on Draft Report by Climate Working Group

Today, the American Tort Reform Association submitted comments to the U.S....

Montana Emerges As National Tort Reform Leader in ATRA’s 2025 “Legislative HeatCheck”

Today, the American Tort Reform Association named Montana a 2025 “Tort Ref...

Search Resources

Search through all of ATRA's Amicus Briefs, Reports, and Other Resources around Public Nuisance Expansion and Litigation
Search All
States
Status
Post Types
Date
Anne Arundel County v. Express Scripts
(Md., filed May 29, 2025): Arguing that the Court should join other states in affirming that public nuisance law cannot be converted into an all-enco...
Maryland
  • Case Not Yet Decided iconCase Not Yet Decided
Geico Casualty Company v. Jilianne Warner, et. al.
(Ky. App., filed May 28, 2025): Arguing that the court erred in finding that heavy motor trucks, such as tow trucks, are inherently dangerous.  The t...
Kentucky
  • Case Not Yet Decided iconCase Not Yet Decided
Monsanto v. Durnell
(U.S., filed May 9, 2025): Arguing that the Missouri Court of Appeals and other appellate courts have gutted FIFRA’s express preemption provision, al...
SCOTUS
  • Case Not Yet Decided iconCase Not Yet Decided
Gill v. Exxon Mobil Corp. 
(Pa. App., filed June 23, 2025) Arguing that trial courts must zealously ensure the integrity and fairness of the jury system throughout the trial pr...
Drake v. Bayer
(9th Circ., filed March 24, 2025): Arguing that Article III and the Rules Enabling Act preclude construing Rule 23 to permit certification of a class ...
California
9th Circuit
  • Case Not Yet Decided iconCase Not Yet Decided
BRP Group, Inc. v. Wagner
(DE, filed April 15, 2025): Arguing that the carveout in the final clause of Section 6 of S.B. 313 amounts to an unconstitutional bill of attainder an...
Delaware
  • Case Not Yet Decided iconCase Not Yet Decided
Newman v. Bayer Inc.
(2nd Circ., filed April 9, 2025): Arguing that Article III and the Rules Enabling Act preclude construing Rule 23 to permit certification of a class l...
2nd Circuit
  • Case Not Yet Decided iconCase Not Yet Decided
The Plaintiffs’ Lawyer Quest for the Holy Grail
One can only imagine the scene inside the plaintiffs’ lawyers’ R&D laboratory for expansive liability theories when they created today’s public nu...
Perlmutter v. Federal Insurance Company, Harold Perenboom, and William Douberley
(Fl., filed March 20, 2025): Section 768.72 of Florida law deliberately altered the common law to raise the evidentiary burden for recovering punitive...
Florida
  • Case Not Yet Decided iconCase Not Yet Decided
Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings v. Davis et. al.
(U.S., filed March 12, 2025): Arguing that Rule 23(b)(3) does not circumvent fundamental limitations on federal jurisdiction in class actions.  The co...
SCOTUS
  • Case Not Yet Decided iconCase Not Yet Decided



The American Tort Reform Association is the nation’s first organization dedicated exclusively to reforming the civil justice system through education and legislative enactment.

To receive occasional updates from ATRA, enter your email address:
By subscribing, you agree to our Privacy Policy and consent to receive updates.
© 2026 ATRA. All rights reserved.