Donaldson v. Central Illinois Public Service Co.
Illinois Supreme Court
767 N.E.2d 314 (2002)
- Written by Eric Miller, JD
Facts
During an approximately two-year period in the town of Taylorville, Illinois, three infants and one teenager were diagnosed with neuroblastoma, a rare form of cancer that was known to occur an average of one time every 29 years within a community the size of Taylorville. All four neuroblastoma patients lived within three miles of a former gas plant that had been owned by Central Illinois Public Service Company (CIPS) (defendant). Families of two of the children (the families) (plaintiffs) brought state-court litigation against CIPS for negligence, nuisance, and other causes of action. The evidentiary record showed that CIPS was aware of the carcinogenic power of coal tar, a byproduct of the coal-gasification process, which CIPS buried under the site in large amounts. The evidence further showed that CIPS had concealed information about the coal tar from the public and from state and federal environmental agencies for decades. Finally, CIPS conducted remediation efforts to remove the contaminated soil from the site. During that time, contractors and nearby residents suddenly became sick with nausea and other ailments. Expert witnesses for the families testified to the high probability that airborne particles of coal tar had caused the sudden instances of neuroblastoma and other sicknesses. CIPS countered that the families had failed to make a showing of both generic and specific causation, along with proof of the patients’ exposure. The jury found that acts and omissions by CIPS during the cleanup process were the proximate cause of the children’s neuroblastoma and that CIPS had breached several duties, including a duty to inform local authorities and residents of the contamination. The jury returned a verdict of $3.2 million for the families, and the court entered judgment against CIPS. The court of appeals affirmed. CIPS appealed to the Illinois Supreme Court.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Fitzgerald, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.