Tort reform reform: Maryland's lead poisoning law needs overhaul

University of Baltimore Journal of Environmental Law

Volumn 12, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 27-53

  Harris, Terry J ^a   Smith, Lisa J ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATION; LEAD; POLLUTION POLICY;

EID: 18844462434     PISSN: 10626212     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (221)

1. Reduction of Lead Risk in Housing Law, 1994 Md. Laws 114 (codified as amended Md. Code Ann., Envir. §§ 6-801-852 (1994)).
2. Terry J. Harris and Lisa J. Smith, Back to the Future. Fixing the Lead Poisoning Prevention Program Act by Partial Repeal, 9 U. Balt. J. Envtl. L. 108, 112-121 (2002).
3. I b i d. at 121-123.
4. Randall Lutter & Elizabeth Mader, Litigating Lead Based Paint Hazards: Is it a Solution?, AEI-Brookings Joint Ctr. for Regulatory Studies 7 (Aug. 2001).
5. Md. Code Ann., Envir. §6-802.
6. I b i d. at § 6-836.
7. I b i d. at § 6-819.
8. I b i d. at §§ 6-811 (b), 6-819, 6-823 (a)-(c).
9. I b i d. at § 6-828.
10. I b i d. at § 6-836.
11. Childhood Lead Poisoning in Baltimore. A Generation Imperiled as Laws Ignored, Abell Rep. 1, 2 (The Abell Foundation) Sept. 2002.
12. Lutter, supra note 5.
13. Md. Dep't of Env't, Lead Poisoning Prevention Program, Childhood Blood Lead Surveillance in Maryland, 2002 Annual Report 15, http:// textonly.mde.state.md.us/ResearchCenter/Publications/Land/index.asp# lead [hereinafter MDE LPPP 2002 Annual Report].
14. Harris, supra note 3.
15. I b i d.
16. I b i d. at 115-116
17. I b i d.
18. I b i d. at 123.
19. H.B. 1245, 2004 Leg., 419th Sess. (Md. 2004), available at http:// mlis.state.md.us/2004rs/billfile/HB1245.htm. The authors were present at the 2004 General Assembly hearings on several bills attacking the rights of lead poisoned children, including the hearing on the bill that resulted in 6-836.1.
20. I b i d.
21. However, it is not as clear whether these measures will have any effect on compliance or prevent childhood lead poisoning. In fact, the authors have some doubts about the value of the legislation in ensuring compliance with risk reduction measures. Requiring evidence of a risk reduction certificate before a landlord may take action in rent court against a tenant seems to be an additional incentive for landlords to obtain fraudulent risk reduction certificates, which we noted years ago was an emerging problem. Harris, supra note 3, at 114. The Maryland Department of Environment is charged with conducting "spot checks" of inspectors who certify properties as compliant in order to ensure that fraudulent certificates are not being filed. Md. Cone Ann., Envir. §§ 6-825 (2004). However, with only two (2) inspectors to police the entire State of Maryland, the Maryland Department of Environment has virtually no chance of catching even a fraction of the landlords and inspection companies who are producing fraudulent certificates. Telephone Interview by Lisa J. Smith with a representative of the Maryland Department of Environment (Oct. 20, 2004). Without the willingness and ability of the Maryland Department of Environment to effectively police fraudulent certificates of risk reduction, the benefits of increased registration and increased production of certificates are illusory and likely to be grossly inflated. A law that is not enforced is worthless to those the law purports to protect. But that's perhaps another article for another day.
22. H.B. 1245, 2004 Leg., 419th Sess. (Md. 2004), available at http:// mlis.state.md.us/2004rs/billfile/HB1245.htm. The authors were present at the 2004 General Assembly hearings on several bills attacking the rights of lead poisoned children, including the learning on the bill that resulted in 6-836.1; see infra note 32 and accompanying text.
23. H.B. 1245, 2004 Leg., 419th Sess. (Md. 2004) (codified as amended Md. Code Ann., Envir. §§ 6-836.1 (2004)), available at http://mlis.state.md.us/2004rs/billfile/HB1245.htm.
24. Md. Decl. of Rts. art. 20; see infra note 32 and accompanying text.
25. see infra note 32 and accompanying text.
26. Md. Decl. of Rts. art. 20.
27. 21 M.L.E. Trial § 51 (2004) (citations omitted).
28. See infra note 32 and accompanying text.
29. See Md. Code Ann., Envir. §§ 6-811, 812, 815, 817, 819, 820, and 823.
30. I b i d. at § 6-836.
31. H.B. 1245, 2004 Leg., 419th Sess. (Md. 2004) (codified as amended Md. Code Ann., Envir. §§ 6-836.1 (2004)), available at http://mlis.state.md.us/2004rs/billfile/HB1245.htm.
32. The Seventh Amendment to the United States guarantees the right to a jury trial. U.S. Const. amend. VII. The Maryland Constitution guarantees a right to a jury trial on disputed facts in actions at law. Md. Decl. of Rts. art. 23. Section 6-836.1 of the Act violates the Plaintiffs' right to a jury trial. It is indisputable that these cases are actions at law. Murphy v. Edmonds, 325 Md. 342, 371 (1992);
33. See infra note 36.
34. See infra note 36.
35. 21 M.L.E. Trial § 51 (citations omitted).
36. Orear v. McDonald, 9 Gill 350, 355 (Md. 1850).
37. See 63C Am. Jur. 2d Public Officers and Employees § 405 (2004).
38. I b i d. (citations omitted).
39. Thompson v. Paul Thompson & Sons, 258 Md. 391, 394-95 (1970) (in this workers compensation case, the Court of Appeals stated, "It is equally well settled that where the terms and manner of employment are disputed, and different inferences may be drawn therefrom, the issue as to the relation that existed between the parties is a mixed question of law and fact to be determined by the trier of the facts under proper instructions.");
40. Artis v. Cyphers, 100 Md. App. 633, 652 (1994) (in this case involving good samaritan immunity, defendant's immunity "will depend on whether his alleged negligence constituted gross negligence, a matter that is in sharp dispute. Ordinarily, unless the facts are so clear as to permit a conclusion as a matter of law, it is for the trier of fact to determine whether a defendant's negligent conduct amounts to gross negligence.");
41. Burns Int'l Detective Agency, Inc. v. Ferris, 16 Md. App. 568 (1973) (in workers compensation case, the Court of Special Appeals stated, "where the terms and manner of employment are disputed and different inferences may be drawn therefrom, the issue as to the relation that existed between the parties is a mixed question of law and fact, to be determined by the trier of facts.").
42. See also, Gill v. State, 265 Md. 350 (1972) (Court of Appeals held in criminal case that even if judge concludes that confession was voluntary, trier of fact must still have opportunity to consider evidence pertaining to voluntariness before deciding guilt of accused; an involuntary confession may be ruled inadmissible by court in gatekeeping function to protect rights of defendant, but court is not permitted to decide ultimate issue of voluntariness.).
43. Md. Decl. of Rts. art. 4, § 18.
44. I b i d. at art. 8.
45. I b i d. at art. 4, § 18.
46. Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 1-201 (2004).
47. Md. R. 1-201.
48. Md. Decl. of Rts. art. 4, § 18.
49. Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 1-201.
50. See Md. Decl. of Rts. art. 8.
51. See Md. R. 2-501, 2-503.
52. Md. R. 2-501.
53. I b i d.
54. Md. R. 2-501(d).
55. I b i d.
56. Md. R. 2-501(f).
57. Md. R. 2-503(b).
58. I b i d.
59. Compare Md. R. 2-503(b) with Md. Code Ann., Envir. §6-836.1.
60. Md. R. 2-501, 2-503.
61. Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 1-201;
62. Md. Const., art. 4, §18.
63. Mem. of the Md. Jud. Conf. to the House Envtl. Matters Comm., Mar. 22, 2004 (emphasis supplied).
64. I b i d.
65. I b i d. (emphasis supplied).
66. H.B. 1245, 2004 Leg., 419th Sess. (Md. 2004) (codified as amended Md. Code Ann., Envir. §§ 6-836.1 (2004)), available at http://mlis.state.md.us/2004rs/billfile/HB1245.htm.
67. Md. R. 2-503(b).
68. Md. R. 1-201.
69. Jones v. State, 379 Md. 704, 740 (2001).
70. I b i d.
71. Md. Decl. of Rts. art. 4, § 18.
72. Harris, supra note 3, at 117. The Due Process Clause of the Maryland Constitution, contained in Article 24 of the Declaration of Rights, provides the same concept of equal protection of the laws as the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. contained in Article 24 of the Declaration of Rights, provides the same concept of equal protection of the laws as the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
73. Hargrove v. Board of Trustees, 310 Md. 406, 416 (1987);
74. Att'y Gen. v. Waldron, 289 Md. 683 (1981).
75. I b i d.
76. Md. Code Ann., Envir. § 6-802.
77. Murphy v. Edmonds, 325 Md. 342, 355-58 (1992).
78. I b i d. at 356.
79. I b i d. (quoting Broadwater v. State, 306 Md. 597, 603 (1986)).
80. Richmond v. J.A. Croson Co., 488 U.S. 469, 520 (1989) (Scalia, J., concurring).
81. An analysis of 2001 data reported to the CDC on children with confirmed lead poisoning from forty-four (44) states showed that, where data on race was available, the majority of children with confirmed elevated lead levels were African American. Pamela A. Meyer et al., Ctrs. for Disease Control, Surveillance for Elevated Blood Lead Levels Among Children-United States, 1997-2001, 52 MMWR No. SS-10 (Sept. 12, 2003), http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ss5210al.htm.
82. In a six year survey measuring the health of the civilian population two months of age and older, the prevalence of elevated blood lead levels among one to two year-old non Hispanic black children was 2.5 times higher than for white children. Debra J. Brody et al., Blood Lead Levels in the U.S. Population, 272 JAMA 277 (1994).
83. According to the U.S. General Accounting Office, the prevalence of elevated blood lead levels in non-Hispanic black children (21.9%) living in housing built before 1946 was nearly four times that of non-Hispanic white children (5.6%). Ctrs. for Disease Control, Recomendations for Blood Lead Screening of Young Children Enrolled in Medicaid: Targeting a Group at Risk, 49 MMWR No. RR-14,1-13 (Dec. 8, 2000), http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr4914A1.htm.
84. See, e.g., MDE LPPP 2002 Annual Report, supra note 14, at 10;
85. See supra note 32 and accompanying text;
86. Hill v. Fitzgerald, 304 Md. 689, 702 (1985).
87. See United States v. Carolene Prods., 304 U.S. 144, 153-54 (1938)
88. Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Ctr., 473 U.S. 432, 440 (1985);
89. Regents of the Univ. of Cal. v. Bakke, 438 U.S. 265, 290 (1978).
90. Grimes v. Kennedy Krieger, 366 Md. 29, 108-09 (2001);
91. Berrain v. Katzen, 331 Md. 693, 710-11 (1993);
92. Fulton v. K&M Assoc., 331 Md. 712, 717 (1993).
93. Murphy v. Edmonds, 325 Md. 342, 358 (1992) (citing Boren, 429 U.S. at 149).
94. See supra note 24.
95. See supra note 32 and accompanying text.
96. See discussion infra pp. 18-23.
97. See discussion infra pp. 18-23.
98. MDE LPPP 2002 Annual Report, supra note 14, at 3.
99. Id at 2-3.
100. See infra pp. 22-23.
101. See infra pp. 22-23.
102. Lutter, supra note 5.
103. See infra pp. 22-23.
104. Meyer, supra note 75, at 1.
105. See infra pp. 22-23.
106. Meyer, supra note 75.
107. Md. Code Ann., Envir. §§ 6-801, 6-817.
108. Bruce P. Lanphear et al., U.S. Dep't of Health and Human Services, Cognitive Deficits Associated with Blood Lead Concentrations <10 μg/dL in US Children and Adolescents, 115 Pub. Heath Rep. 521, 526-529 (2000);
109. see also Richard L. Canfield et al., Intellectual Impairment in Children with Blood Lead Concentrations Below 10 ug per Deciliter, 348 New. Eng. J. Med. 16 (Apr. 17, 2003).
110. I b i d. at 526.
111. Meyer, supra note 75.
112. I b i d.
113. I b i d.
114. Ctrs. for Disease Control, Blood Lead Levels in Young Children-United States and Selected States, 1996-1999, 49 MMWR 50, 1133 (Dec. 22, 2000), http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm4950a3.htm (last visited Jan. 29, 2005).
115. CtrsT. for Disease Control, Children's Blood Lead Levels in the United States, http://www.cdc.gov/nceh/lead/research/kidsBLL.htm#Tracking%20BLL (last visited Jan. 29, 2005).
116. I b i d.
117. I b i d.
118. I b i d.
119. I b i d.
120. I b i d.
121. I b i d.
122. Compare Md. Dep't of Env't, Lead Poisoning Prevention Program, Childhood Blood Lead Surveillance in Maryland, 1999 Ann. Rep. 9, http:// textonly.mde.state.md.us/ResearchCenter/Publications/Land/index.as#lead [hereinafter MDE LPPP 1999 Annual Report] with Meyer,
123. supra note 75, at Tbl. 6.
124. MDE LPPP 1999 Annual Report, supra note 109.
125. Meyer, supra note 75, at Tbl. 6.
126. MDE LPPP 2002 Annual Report, supra note 14, at 7.
127. Meyer, supra note 75, at Tbl. 6.
128. MDE LPPP 2002 Annual Report, supra note 14, at 10.
129. I b i d.
130. See Meyer, supra note 75.
131. I b i d.
132. See id.
133. David E. Jacobs et al., The Prevalence of Lead-Based Paint Hazards in U.S. Housing, 110 Envir. Health Perspectives 599 (Oct. 2002), http:// ehp.niehs.nih.gov/members/2002/l00pA599-A606jacobs-full.html.
134. I b i d.
135. I b i d.
136. I b i d.
137. I b i d.
138. I b i d. at 599, 601.
139. Childhood Lead Poisoning in Baltimore: A Generation Imperiled as Laws Ignored, Abell Rep. (The Abell Foundation) Sept. 2002.
140. I b i d. at 1, 2.
141. I b i d. at 2.
142. I b i d.
143. See id.
144. I b i d.
145. I b i d. at 1.
146. Telephone Interview by Lisa J. Smith with a representative of the Maryland Department of Environment (Oct. 20, 2004). This number appears to be down from a total of five inspectors employed in 2000. Jim Haner, Experts fault enforcement of city lead laws, Balt. Sun, Sept. 8, 2000, available at http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/local/ bal-lead24sep08,1,6192474.story?coll=bal-local-utility.
147. City of Baltimore, Project 5000, at http:// www.baltimorehousing.org/index/cd_5000.asp (visited Jan. 29, 2005).
148. I b i d.
149. I b i d.
150. MDE LPPP 2002 Annual Report, supra note 14, at 6.
151. I b i d.
152. Meyer, supra note 75, at Tbl. 6.
153. I b i d.
154. I b i d.
155. MDE LPPP 2001 Annual Report, supra note 76, at 12.
156. MDE LPPP 2002 Annual Report, supra note 14, at 10.
157. Mass. Regs. Code tit. 105, § 460.020 (2002).
158. N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 130-A:2 (2004).
159. N.Y. Pub Health Law § 1370 (Consol. 2004).
160. Meyer, supra note 75.
161. Walter J. Rogan & James H. Ware, Exposure to Lead in Children- How Low is Low Enough, 348 N. Engl. J. Med. 1515 (2003).
162. MDE LPPP 2002 Annual Report, supra note 14, at 2.
163. Maryland Lead Poisoning Prevention Comm'n, Report to the Governor, 14 (2001), http://www.mde.state.md.us/assets/document/LeadCoordination/ leadreport0l.pdf.
164. I b i d. at 17.
165. I b i d. at 16.
166. Md. Code Ann., Envir. § 6-828 (2002).
167. New York City, N.Y., Admin. Code § 27-2056.1 (2004).
168. I b i d.
169. I b i d. at § 27-2056.4(a).
170. I b i d. at § 27-2056.4(e)(1).
171. New York City, N.Y., Admin. Code § 27-2056.4(a) (2003).
172. New York City, N.Y., Admin. Code § 27-2056.4(h) (2004).
173. Mary Jean Brown, Costs and Benefits of Enforcing Housing Policies to Prevent Childhood Lead Poisoning, 22 Med. Decision Making 482, 491 (2002).
174. I b i d. at 488.
175. I b i d. at 483.
176. I b i d.
177. I b i d. at 489.
178. Telephone Interview by Lisa J. Smith with a representative of the Maryland Department of Environment (Oct. 20, 2004).
179. Jeff Haner, Experts Fault Enforcement of City Lead Laws, Balt. Sun, Sept. 8, 2000, available at http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/local/ bal-lead24sep08,1,6192474.story?coll=bal-local-utility.
180. I b i d.
181. Telephone Interview by Lisa J. Smith with a representative of the City of Baltimore, Health Department, Lead Poisoning Prevention Program (Jan. 25, 2005).
182. Ivan Penn, Ehrlich Cuts Funds for Lead Program, Balt. Sun, Jan. 22, 2005, available at http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/local/ politics/bal-md.lead22jan22,1,2467607.story.
183. MDE LPPP 2002 Annual Report, supra note 14;
184. MDE LPPP 2001 Annual Report, supra note 76.
185. Balt., Md., Bldg., Fire, & Related Codes, Int'l Prop. Maint. Code, § 301.4 (2004), http://cityservices.baltimorecity.gov/ charterandcodes/.
186. Ivan Penn, Ehrlich Cuts Funds for Lead Program, Balt. Sun, Jan. 22, 2005, available at http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/local/ politics/bal-md.lead22jan22,1,2467607.story.
187. Balt., Md., Bldg., Fire, & Related Codes, Int'l Prop. Maint. Code, § 301.4 (2004), http://cityservices.baltimorecity.gov/ charterandcodes/.
188. I b i d.
189. In her experience as an attorney for lead poisoned children, one of the authors herein, Lisa J. Smith, has seen numerous Baltimore City Health Department records in which child after child was poisoned at the same property when previous violation notices against the owner(s) were not enforced. http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/local/ bal-lead24sep08,1,6192474.story?coll=bal-local-utility
190. 378 Md. 70 (2003).
191. I b i d. at 85.
192. I b i d. at 80-85.
193. I b i d.
194. I b i d.
195. I b i d.
196. I b i d. at 85.
197. I b i d.
198. Brief for Appellant, Polakoff v. Turner, 155 Md. App. 60 (2004).
199. See discussion supra pp. 18-23.
200. See, e.g., Duncan Kennedy, The Effect of the Warranty of Habitability on Low Income Housing: 'Milking'and Class Violence, 15 Fla. St. U. L. Rev. 485, 489 (1987);
201. see generally Bruce Ackerman, Regulating Slum Housing Markets on Behalf of the Poor: Of Housing Codes, Housing Subsidies and Income Redistribution Policy, 80 Yale L.J. 1093 (1971).
202. Kennedy, supra note 185.
203. I b i d.
204. Brief for Respondent at Apx. 13, 34-35, 37-38, Polakoff v. Turner, 155 Md. App. 60 (2004).
205. I b i d. at Apx. 35 (emphasis supplied).
206. In fact, other jurisdictions have statutes interpreted to impose a higher standard on landlords - strict liability - and there has not been any housing market "disaster" in these jurisdictions. See, e.g., Bencosme v. Kokoras, 507 N.E.2d 748 (Mass. 1987).
207. Moreover, other jurisdictions, such as the District of Columbia and Massachusetts, have enacted stricter laws regarding lead paint, such as a requirement that the lead paint be removed by the landlord when the landlord learns that a child under the age of six will be living at the premises. See, e.g., D.C. Mun. Regs. tit. 14, § 707.3 (2004);
208. See, e.g., Press Release, City of Baltimore Health Department, Failure to Abate City Property for Lead Violations Lands Owner in Jail (Apr. 15, 2004), available at http://www.ci.baltimore.md.us/ government/health/press/040405.html.
209. See, e.g., Press Release, City of Baltimore Health Department, Baltimore City Lead Enforcement Efforts Prove Successful (Feb. 9, 2004), available at http://www.ci.baltimore.md.us/government/health/ press/040209.html.
210. See discussion supra pp. 24-25.
211. Mass. Gen. Laws Ann. ch. 111 §§ 127B, 197.
212. See discussion supra pp. 23-26.
213. As noted supra, at [section reference], Maryland is the only state with a law granting immunity from lawsuits to landlords who take certain registration and risk-reduction measures.
214. MDE LPPP 2002 Annual Report, supra note 14, at 2.
215. I b i d. at 8.
216. I b i d. at 6.
217. See, e.g., Ctrs. for Disease Control, CDC Fact Sheet on Childhood Lead Poisoning, http://198.246.96.2/nceh/lead/faq/about.htm (stating that "[1] ead poisoning is entirely preventable. The key is stopping children from coming into contact with lead.").
218. Lanphear, supra note 96;
219. Walter J. Rogan & James H. Ware, Exposure to Lead in Children-How Low is Low Enough, 348 N. Engl. J. Med. 348; 16, 1515 (2003);
220. Rogan, supra note 148.
221. As this article was going to press, Governor Ehrlich announced his 2005 legislative initiative on childhood lead poisoning. Ivan Penn & Timothy B. Wheeler, Ehrlich Bill Aims at Lead Problem, Balt. Sun. Jan. 19, 2005, available at http://www.baltimoresun.com/news /local/politics/bal-md.leadl9janl9,1,5089059.story. The bill, HB 251/SB 212, reduces in February 2006 the threshold lead levels in the Act to 10 ug/dl for the notice provisions to trigger the risk reduction measures encoded at 6-817 and 6-819, and to 15 ug/dl for the limited liability provisions in 6-828 and 6-831. In addition to the authors' alarm about the apparent concessions made in other parts of the bill to the landlord lobby in return for lowering the threshold levels, the authors point remains the same. Lowering the threshold blood lead levels to 10 ug/dl to trigger risk reduction ignores the reality of the scientific understanding that harmful effects from lead are experienced by children at blood lead levels below 10 ug/dl, even below 5 ug/dl. See sources cited supra note 202. The new legislation would still lag behind the scientific and human realities of the dangers of "lower" levels of lead exposure. Moreover, the children who suffer real and substantial damage from blood lead levels below 15 ug/dl would be left without any remedy at law.