Timothy P. Rumberger, Esq. State Bar #145984
Law Offices of Timothy P. Rumberger
2161 Shattuck Avenue, Suite 200
Berkeley, California 94704-1313 |
Telephone: (510)841-5500
Facsimile: (510)841-5501
e-mail: tim@rumbergerlaw.com |
Attorneys for Plaintiffs individually, and
on behalf of all those similarly situated
IN AND FOR THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF ALAMEDA,
Alameda County Superior Court Case No. RG08383068
ROSIE LEE EVANS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs,
v.
PACIFIC STEEL CASTING COMPANY.,
BERKELEY PROPERTIES LLC,
and DOES 1 to XX,
Defendants . |
|
Case No.
CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT FOR NEGLIGENCE, BATTERY, TRESPASS, PUBLIC NUISANCE, PRIVATE NUISANCE, INTENTIONAL MISREPRESENTATION, UNLAWFUL BUSINESS PRACTICES, AND FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED |
|
|
|
COMMON FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
1. For 75 years PACIFIC STEEL CASTING COMPANY (PSC) has been releasing toxic fumes and hazardous metals, magnesium, nickel and particulate matter on its downwind neighbors in the homes surrounding the three industrial plants off Second Street in Berkeley, California.
2. Since 2004, industrial operations have continued 24-hours-day six days a week, as growing production at PSC has more than doubled.
3. PSC reported to the state of California in 2004 that it disposed of 76 tons of toxic air pollution into Berkeley’s air-shed, or about 420 pounds per day, including 13 tons of airborne particulates blanketing Plaintiffs living in the down-wind neighborhood.
4. From 2005-2006, PSC released 529 pounds of manganese and 19 pounds of nickel into the air, according to its own public reports to the Bay Area Air Quality Management District.
5. Agency data reveals similarly high levels of PSC emissions, totaling 691.3 pounds of manganese and 55.8 pounds of nickel in a single year, in addition to hexavalent chromium, cadmium and arsenic.
6. According to the California Air Resources Board (CARB), airborne pollutants (including benzene, copper, cresols, phenol and zinc) have increased from PSC by over 160%, with PSC’s manganese and nickel emissions increasing 51.6%, formaldehyde increasing 127.2%, lead increasing 128.5%, over the past few years, together with a substantial increase in total particulates.
7. According to the current CARB database, PSC accounts for 99% of all industrial nickel emissions from the 33 West Berkeley industrial sources, and 100% of all manganese emissions in this neighborhood.
8. Since 2004, a doubling of neighborhood complaints to the BAAQMD reporting foul smelling odors and noxious fumes from PSC has corresponded to the increase in production.
9. Scientifically reliable air-sampling data collected over the past several months by Global Community Monitoring under a grant from the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) evidences manganese and nickel concentrations hundreds of times higher than deemed safe by the World Health Organization and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (nickel levels 180-220 times the U.S. EPA reference concentration in the 700 block of Gilman in Berkeley; nickel levels 330 times the the U.S. EPA reference concentration in the 1300 block of Third Street in Berkeley; manganese levels 10-20 times the World Health Organization safe health levels in the 600 block of Gilman and the 1300 block of 3rd street).
10. A toxic-footprint has emerged from numerous 24-hour air samples taken at 23 sites in the west Berkeley neighborhood during 2007 evidencing hazardous concentrations of nickel and manganese across the PSC residential neighborhoods from Second Street where the PSC plants are located, and Page Street (to the south of PSC), to as far as Kains Avenue (10 blocks east of PSC) and the University housing park community (to the north of PSC).
11. Manganese is a toxic air contaminate targeting the brain, the lungs and the testes, and capable of causing respiratory injury including sore throats, exacerbated asthma, and breathing related symptoms, as well as neurological damage with symptoms including tremors, memory loss, delayed reaction time and poor hand-eye coordination.
12. Nickle has similarly been determined by the California Air Resources Board to be a toxic air contaminate, and has been classified as a carcinogenic to humans by the United States Environmental Protection Agency and by the International Agency for Research on Cancer.
13. Plaintiffs bring this Complaint on behalf of themselves, and all those similarly situated persons who reside or have resided for six-months or more within the statutory period preceding the date of the filing of this Complaint on April 22, 2008, to the date of final resolution by settlement or judgment of this litigation, in a dwelling located within the downwind neighborhood of PSC from Second Street where the PSC plants are located, along Page Street (to the south of PSC), to properties along the east side of Kains Avenue (10 blocks east of PSC) to the south-side of Marin Avenue and Buchanan Street (including the University housing park community) north of PSC.
14. Defendants knew that the offensive and/or hazardous airborne emissions from PSC and of the nuisance, trespass, battery and potential health threat they pose, yet failed to adequately mitigate them from having a detrimental off-site impact, failed to warn of the known potential dangers to Plaintiffs’ health posed thereby, and further misrepresented the continuing history of these conditions to, and concealed such risks from, Plaintiffs.
15. Defendants’ engaged in a pattern of willful and conscious disregard for Plaintiffs’ rights and safety by actions of commission and omission including Defendants’ failure to prevent the harmful and/or offensive emissions or odors, fumes and particulate matter from having an off-site impact, Defendants’ reckless disregard for Plaintiffs’ health by exposing them to these environmental hazards adverse to their health, and Defendants’ delay or failure to warn or advise Plaintiffs as to how to address known air contamination, indeed covering up its pervasive and longstanding existence.
16. Due to these defective conditions, Plaintiffs were forced to either vacate their homes temporarily or permanently relocate, or suffer the nuisance, emotional distress and/or fear of adverse health consequences caused thereby.
DEFENDANTS
17. Plaintiffs are unaware of the capacities and identities of those defendants named as DOES 1 through XX, and will seek leave to amend this complaint when same are ascertained.
18. Plaintiffs are informed, believe and allege thereon that Defendant PACIFIC STEEL CASTING COMPANY is, and at all times relevant was, the owner, operator and management entity responsible for maintaining and operating the three industrial steel casting plants in Berkeley, California, specifically located at 1333 2nd Street (PLANT #1), 648 Page Street (PLANT #2) and 1421 2nd Street (PLANT #3), hereinafter the SUBJECT PREMISES.
19. Plaintiffs are informed, believe and allege that Defendant BERKELEY PROPERTIES LLC is, and at all times herein relevant was, a California Limited Liability Corporation which holds title to all land coterminous with the SUBJECT PREMISES and upon which PACIFIC STEEL CASTING COMPANY is operating.
20. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and based thereon allege that at all times herein relevant Defendants have conspired together or acted in concert in their capacities as owners, lessors, managers and/or operators of the SUBJECT PREMISES and PACIFIC STEEL CASTING COMPANY in such manner as to recklessly violate Plaintiffs' rights.
21. At all times herein relevant, Plaintiffs were residents in lawful possession of various homes, habitable property or rental units who have resided for six-months or more within the statutory period preceding the date of the filing of this Complaint on April 22, 2008, (to the date of final resolution by settlement or judgment of this litigation), located within the downwind neighborhood of PSC from Second Street where the PSC plants are located, along Page Street (to the south of PSC), to properties along the east side of Kains Avenue (10 blocks east of PSC) to south-side Marin Avenue and Buchanan Street (including the University housing park community) north of PSC, all individually and similarly situated to Plaintiff ROSIE LEE EVANS who has resided at all times herein relevant at 808 Camelia Street, Berkeley.
COMMON LEGAL ALLEGATIONS
22. As a proximate result of Defendants' acts of omission and commission arising from the negligent operation of PACIFIC STEEL CASTING COMPANY, Plaintiffs have endured inconvenience, nuisance, trespass upon their owned or leased property, battery unto their persons, violation of their right to quiet enjoyment of their homes, and such ordinary emotional distress as is reasonably foreseeable from suffering Defendants’ acts and ommissions.
23. At all times herein relevant, the representative Plaintiff(s) identified herein was/were and is/are natural person(s), residing within Alameda County in the State of California and, in particular, having resided 808 Camelia Street, in the City of Berkeley.
24. As used throughout this Complaint, the term Plaintiffs and/or Class refers to each and every named plaintiff herein, and each and every person eligible for membership in one or more of the plaintiff sub-classes, as described and defined below.
25. At all times herein relevant, the Representative Plaintiff(s) was/were and now are persons within the class of persons described and defined herein.
26. The Representative Plaintiff(s) bring this action on behalf of themselves and as a class action, pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure §382, on behalf of all persons similarly situated and proximately damaged by Defendants' practices as described herein.
CLASS ALLEGATIONS
27. Plaintiffs bring this action on behalf of themselves and as a class action on behalf of all persons proximately damaged by Defendants' conduct of polluting the downwind neighborhood with airborne contamination including particulate matter, manganese, nickel, noxious fumes and odors generating from PACIFIC STEEL CASTING COMPANY, including , but not limited to the following Classes:
A. The Nuisance Class.
The "Nuisance Class" consists of all persons who were, at any time within the statutory period prior to the filing of this Action to the present, the lawful residents of a private home or residential real property rental unit located within the downwind neighborhood of PSC -- from Second Street where the PSC plants are located, along Page Street (to the south of PSC), to properties along the east side of Kains Avenue (10 blocks east of PSC) to the south side of Marin Avenue and Buchanan Street (including the University housing park community) north of PSC [hereinafter the Nuisance Footprint]– subjected to noxious odors, fumes, particulate matter and hazardous emissions including manganese and nickel, caused by PSC’s negligent conduct.
B. The Punitive Damage Class.
The "Punitive Damage" consists of all persons entitled to compensatory damages as a result of the acts and omissions of intentional, reckless or conscious disregard by defendants with respect to the emission of noxious odors, fumes, particulate matter and hazardous emissions including manganese and nickel.
28. Defendants, their officers, directors, employees and subsidiaries are excluded from each of the Classes.
29. Plaintiffs and the class members share a community of interest in which numerous common questions of fact and law predominate over any questions solely affecting individual members, including, but not necessarily limited to:
a) whether Defendants committed and/or participated in the acts alleged;
b) whether Defendants breached duties of care;
c) whether Defendants acted recklessly and/or willfully;
d) whether Defendants committed violations of law;
e) whether Defendants' conduct constitutes negligence,
f) whether Defendants' conduct constitutes battery,
g) whether Defendants' conduct constitutes trespass
h) whether Defendants’ conduct constitutes a public nuisance;
i) whether Defendants’ conduct constitutes a private nuisance;
j) whether Defendants' conduct constitutes intentional misrepresentation,
k) whether Defendants' conduct constitutes a violation of Business and Professions Code §17200, et seq.;
l) whether Plaintiffs are entitled to damages for nuisance, annoyance, inconvenience, and/or loss of enjoyment of legal rights, emotional distress, among other damages and, if so, what is the appropriate means of calculating such monetary damages; and
m) what is the liability of Defendants, and each of them, for causing these damages suffered by all Plaintiffs as a proximate result of Plaintiffs’ exposure to the harmful or offensive emissions from PACIFIC STEEL CASTING COMPANY.
30. A class action is the only available method for the fair and efficient adjudication of this controversy. The members of the Class are so numerous that joinder of all members is impractical, if not impossible, as the total population of residents in the affected residential units in the effected neighborhood is likely to exceeds over 1000 individuals.
31. Since the damages suffered by individual Class members, while not inconsequential, may in some instances be relatively small, the expense and burden of individual litigation by each makes it impractical for members of the Class to seek redress individually for the wrongful conduct alleged herein.
32. Moreover, should separate actions be brought or be required to be brought by each individual member of the Class, the resulting multiplicity of lawsuits would cause undue hardship and expense for the Court and the litigants. The prosecution of separate actions would also create a risk of inconsistent rulings which might be dispositive of the interests of other Class members who are not parties to the adjudications and/or may substantially impede their ability to adequately protect their interests.
33. The named plaintiff(s) in this class action is/are adequate representative(s) of the Class, in that the plaintiffs' claims are typical thereof and insofar as these named plaintiffs have the same interests in the litigation of this case as other plaintiffs.
34. The named plaintiffs are committed to vigorous prosecution of this case, and have retained competent counsel, experienced in litigation of this nature.
35. The named plaintiffs are not subject to any individual defenses unique from those conceivably applicable to the Class as a whole.
36. The named plaintiffs anticipate no management difficulties in this litigation.
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION FOR NEGLIGENCE
37. Plaintiffs reallege the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint.
38. As owners and operators of the SUBJECT PREMISES and PACIFIC STEEL CASTING COMPANY, Defendants, at all times relevant within two years prior to the present to the present, were under a duty of care to take reasonable measures to assure that Plaintiffs were not exposed to unreasonable risk of harm and/or interference of their right to quiet enjoyment of their homes, to comply with all applicable codes, laws and regulatory obligations relating to health and safety, to respect Plaintiffs' rights to protection from wrongful threats to their rights to possession of their homes, and generally to refrain from conduct reasonably likely to cause damage to Plaintiffs.
39. Moreover, Plaintiffs are among the class of persons designed to be protected by said laws, and the conduct as complained of herein is among the type of conduct which such measures are intended to regulate.
40. Despite Defendants’ duty to act reasonably as set forth above, within two years prior to the filing of this action to the present Defendants failed to do so, perpetually violating Plaintiffs' right to quiet enjoyment by causing and permitting the emissions of harmful and/or offensive airborne particulate matter, manganese, nickel, noxious odors and fumes.
41. In doing and failing to do the things as alleged herein, Defendants did breach this general duty of care and did cause Plaintiffs residing within the NUISANCE FOOTPRINT to suffer damages as a proximate result thereof.
42. As a foreseeable, direct and proximate result of Defendants’ acts of omission and commission, Plaintiffs have suffered great expense, loss, anxiety and inconvenience as aforesaid, in excess of $25,000 each for which Defendants are jointly and severally liable.
SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION FOR TRESPASS
43. Plaintiffs reallege the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint.
44. Plaintiffs are and were, for all relevant times, in lawful possession of certain real property within the NUISANCE FOOTPRINT, as herein described.
45. Defendants engaged in the ownership, management and operation of PACIFIC STEEL CASTING COMPANY and the SUBJECT PREMISES in such a manner that resulted in Defendants’ exposure of Plaintiffs to air borne contamination, including particulate “fall-out” of emissions from PSC on the real property owned or rented by Plaintiffs and on Plaintiffs’ personal property of Plaintiffs.
46. Defendants’ exposure of Plaintiffs and Plaintiffs’ owned or leased real property and personal property to the continuing contamination, was intentional, knowing, deliberate and done with reckless disregard for the harmful or offensive contact such exposure would foreseeably cause to Plaintiffs and Plaintiffs’ property.
47. Plaintiffs, at no time, consented to the intrusion of said substances onto their respective properties.
48. As a proximate result of Defendants’ conduct, as set forth herein, Plaintiffs have sustained damages, as set forth herein.
THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION FOR BATTERY
49. Plaintiffs reallege the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint.
50. Defendants, and each of them, within two years prior to the filing of this action to the present, acted intentionally and volitionally, with the foreseeable consequence of causing an unconsented harmful or offensive contact with Plaintiffs residing within the NUISANCE FOOTPRINT, in conscious disregard for Plaintiffs’ rights and safety, with respect to the events alleged in this Complaint, including, but not limited to recklessly operating PACIFIC STEEL CASTING COMPANY under the following conditions:
(a) permitting Plaintiffs’ exposure to high levels of airborne contamination, releasing excessive quantities of magnesium, nickle and particulate matter into the environment;
(b) failing to prevent, or sufficiently mitigate or remediate said contamination in a timely or effective manner;
(c) failing to timely warn Plaintiffs of the presence of the airborne contamination, and of the risks of exposure to elevated hazardous concentrations of magnesium and nickel; and
(d) continuing to operate in a reckless manner in order to maximize profits, while intentionally exposing Plaintiffs, and each of them, to harmful emissions;
51. Defendants, and each of them, committed a battery upon Plaintiffs by willfully and unlawfully engaging in the course of conduct described above, which forced Plaintiffs to suffer harmful and offensive contact upon their exposure to the airborne contamination.
52. As a direct and proximate result of the above-described willful and unlawful conduct of Defendants, Plaintiffs have sustained damages, as set forth herein.
53. Moreover, in that, at all times herein mentioned, Defendants, and each of them, intended to cause or acted with reckless disregard of the probability of causing injury to Plaintiffs, and because these defendants were guilty of oppressive, fraudulent and/or malicious conduct, Plaintiffs are entitled to an award of exemplary or punitive damages in an amount adequate to deter such conduct in the future.
FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION FOR PUBLIC NUISANCE
54. Plaintiffs reallege the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint.
55. The operation of PACIFIC STEEL CASTING COMPANY at the SUBJECT PREMISES by Defendants within three years prior to the filing of this action to the present, caused and continues to cause exposure to residents thereof, constituting a public nuisance.
56. The airborne contamination, noxious odors, chemical fumes, manganese, nickel and particulate matter have migrated, and continue to migrate, into the environment, continuing to damage Plaintiffs persons and property and contiguous natural resources of the State of California and, thereby, depriving the residents and the people of the State of California of the right to use and enjoy those natural resources in their natural, uncontaminated form.
57. These defendants continue to commit this public nuisance in the course of their profit-making activity, and benefited monetarily from the inexpensive, but environmentally irresponsible, methods of manufacturing steel castings, covering up and/or merely cosmetically addressing or insufficiently mitigating the airborne contamination.
58. Plaintiffs were unaware of, and never consented to, any of Defendants’ foregoing conduct.
59. The nuisance affects a considerable number of persons, but at the same time, causes special injury to Plaintiffs in that the natural resources located within their homes and immediate community are affected most greatly.
60. As a proximate result of Defendants’ conduct, as set forth herein, Plaintiffs have sustained damages, as set forth in herein.
FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION FOR PRIVATE NUISANCE
61. Plaintiffs reallege the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint.
62. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based upon such information and belief, herein allege that within three years prior to the filing of this action to the present Defendants owned and/or managed PACIFIC STEEL CASTING COMPANY at the SUBJECT PREMISES in such a manner that allowed high concentrations of airborne contamination, noxious odors, chemical fumes, manganese, nickel and particulate matter to be released into the environment, and onto Plaintiffs’ owned or leased property.
63. The aforementioned ownership, management and operation of PACIFIC STEEL CASTING COMPANY at the SUBJECT PREMISES in the manner herein-described, constitutes a nuisance within the meaning of California Civil Code section 3479, in that it interfered with Plaintiffs’ comfortable and quiet enjoyment of their property.
64. That nuisance created by Defendants’ negligent or reckless exposure of Plaintiffs to high concentrations of airborne contamination, noxious odors, chemical fumes, manganese, nickel and particulate matter, is continuing.
65. Plaintiffs have never consented to said nuisance.
66. As a proximate result of the nuisance, Plaintiffs have been deprived of the full use and enjoyment of their property and have suffered and will continue to suffer damages in amount according to proof in excess of $25,000 each.
67. As a proximate result of Defendants’ conduct, as set forth herein, Plaintiffs have sustained damages, as set forth in herein.
SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION FOR INTENTIONAL MISREPRESENTATION
(Fraud, Deceit, and Conspiracy to Deceive)
68. Plaintiffs reallege the preceding paragraphs of this complaint.
69. Defendants represented PACIFIC STEEL CASTING COMPANY to the pubic including Plaintiffs to be non-hazardous to their health and safety.
70. Defendants knew, and had reason to know, that PACIFC STEEL CASTING COMPANY was producing high concentrations of airborne contamination, noxious odors, chemical fumes, manganese, nickel and particulate matter which it released into the neighborhood.
71. Moreover, Defendants concealed from Plaintiffs the existence of the airborne contamination effecting the downwind neighborhood.
72. Additionally, defendants, and each of them, conspired together to make representations to Plaintiffs, that the SUBJECT PREMISES and PACIFIC STEEL CASTING COMPANY did not producing high concentrations of airborne contamination, noxious odors, chemical fumes, manganese, nickel and particulate matter which it released into the neighborhood, and/or that defendants were taking all reasonable steps to secure and protect the health and safety of the residents, while knowing that these representations were false.
73. The Defendants, and each of them, made these representations with the intent that plaintiffs would rely on them, to Defendants’ gain and to Plaintiffs’ injury.
74. Plaintiffs did, in fact, justifiably rely upon the misrepresentations of the Defendants, and such reasonable reliance proximately caused Plaintiffs’ injuries as a foreseeable consequence of Plaintiffs’ reliance on Defendants’ misrepresentations of said facts.
75. Plaintiffs claim damages for the disruption of and inconvenience to their lives in and about their homes, and for emotional distress as a direct consequence of their reliance on Defendants’ misrepresentations of fact.
76. Plaintiffs, therefore, seek and are entitled to punitive damages for Defendants’ reckless disregard for Plaintiffs, and for Defendants’ intentional misrepresentations
SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION FOR UNLAWFUL BUSINESS PRACTICES
(Violation of Business and Professions Code 17200, et seq.)
77. Plaintiffs reallege the preceding paragraphs of this complaint.
78. Defendants' operation of PACIFIC STEEL CASTING COMPANY and the SUBJECT PREMISES in a reckless and environmentally hazardous manner was and is an integral part of their unlawful business practice. Defendants' practice constitutes, among other things, maintaining substandard, dangerous, and unhealthy processes without adequate mitigation of emissions and as such is unfairly competing with lawful business owners.
79. By violating the law as set forth above, Defendants are able to operate their industrial facility substantially below the costs of other non-tortious and law abiding competing businesses, thus deriving unjust profits, unfairly and in violation of Business and Professions Code §17200, et seq.
80. Defendants threaten to and unless restrained will continue to engage in these unlawful practices.
81. In addition to requesting the Court to enjoin these practices and conditions, Plaintiffs request restitution and disgorgement of profits made as a result of this wrongful conduct.
82. Plaintiffs further request a civil penalty of $2,500 be imposed against defendants as to each Plaintiff for each violation of Business and Professions Code §17200, et seq.
REQUEST FOR INJUCTIVE RELIEF
83. Plaintiffs reallege the preceding paragraphs of this complaint.
84. Defendants' operation of PACIFIC STEEL CASTING COMPANY in the reckless and environmentally hazardous manner it does constitutes a continuing threat to the residents and putative Class Members residing within the NUISANCE FOOTPRINT.
85. Defendants have known about these offensive and dangerous emissions for years and have attempted to cover them up and failed to properly remedy them.
86. Defendants threaten to, and unless restrained will continue to, engage in these tortious practices.
87. As such, Plaintiffs respectfully request the Court to enjoin these practices and conditions, and order Defendants to mitigate and reduce its off-site toxic emissions to safe levels consistent with the United States Environmental Protection Agency and World Health Organization concentration limitations – or relocate from this residential neighborhood.
To establish the following procedures:
a) Centralized Record Keeping System
Create and maintain a central file and a system to ensure management collection and
retention of all complaints, claims, or emissions reports.
b) FENCELINE Testing Procedure
Install and maintain continuous 24-hour-per-day fenceline monitors with real-time transmission of all measurable emission concentrations to a publicly accessible internet site
c) Notice to All Residents within the NUISANCE FOOTPRINT
1) Notice to all residents: All residents shall be provided with clear, written notice of the content and scope of PSC’s emissions; a clear statement that these emissions may present a health issue, particularly to those susceptible respiratory symptoms; and common symptoms resulting from exposure to PSC’s emissions.
2) Establish a PSC neighborhood organization: Defendants shall, in good faith, assist in the creation of, and support a NUISANCE FOOTPRINT-wide neighborhood organization for the purposes of communicating regarding emergency incidents and minimizing exposure generally. Such support shall include advising residents of the PSC neighborhood organization, providing means and space for notices and communication, and providing material support, such as a meeting location within the neighborhood. Defendants shall not monitor or influence or attempt to monitor or influence the activities of the organization, except as required in response to communication from the organization.
RELIEF SOUGHT
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs, on behalf of themselves and the proposed Classes, pray for judgment and the following relief against the Defendants, jointly and separately, as follows:
1. For an Order certifying the proposed Class and any appropriate subclasses;
2. For Compensatory damages in an amount to be proven at trial or other expedited alternative procedures adopted by the Court;
3. For Punitive and Exemplary Damages in an amount appropriate and sufficient to punish Defendants, and deter others from engaging in similar misconduct in the future;
4. For an Order requiring Defendants to implement appropriate mitigation procedures, staffing and/or equipment upgrades to restore and preserve the quality of the air in the residential neighborhood downwind of PACIFIC STEEL CASTING COMPANY;
5. Penalties, disgorged profits and attorneys' fees pursuant to Business and Professions Code '17200, et seq.;
6. For costs of removal of any harmful substances from Plaintiffs’ real and/or personal property and/or all other related remedial action;
7. For interest on the amount of any/all economic losses, at the prevailing legal rate;
8. For reasonable Attorneys' Fees, pursuant to California Civil Code '1021.5; and
9. For Costs of suit and any and all such other relief as the Court deems just and proper.
DATED: APRIL 22, 2008
EARTH DAY TIMOTHY P. RUMBERGER, Esq.
Attorneys for Plaintiffs and Class Members
