On April 27, I will be in Chicago speaking on a panel at my old alma mater, Northwestern University (I am a double wildcat – both undergraduate and law school). The subject matter is the Expansion of Liability under Public Nuisance, and the audience is the judiciary. There will be a session on our Rhode Island lead pigment case, [http://www.courts.ri.gov/supreme/pdf-files/04-63_7-2-08.pdf]. I will also be on a panel discussing the recent climate change cases, including Comer v. Murphy Oil, [http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/07/07-60756-CV0.wpd.pdf], in which rehearing en banc was granted a few days ago. I recently posted an entry on my blog over at www.nuisancelaw.com noting that the law of nuisance is not the only body of law which seems to a current hunting ground for a judicial avenue to address these policy questions.
I am always happy to return to my old stomping grounds in the Windy City and am looking forward to discussion on an interesting topic. I thought I'd focus on some of the logistical and administrative problems in processing these types of claims in courts, and how these practical difficulties can be viewed as further support for the conclusion that some issues, like climate change, are simply not meant to be addressed by the judicial branch.
