Opinion ID: 779089
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Defendants' Evidence of Publicity and Warnings

Text: 32 In support of their contention that by the end of 1991 plaintiffs should have known that their cancers were caused by the Landfill, defendants stated, inter alia, that beginning in 1986, large bright yellow signs warning DANGER HAZARDOUS WASTE AREA UNAUTHORIZED PERSONNEL KEEP OUT were posted around the perimeter of the Landfill. Defendants submitted copies of official communications of caution, numerous newspaper articles reporting on studies by the New York State (State) Departments of Health (DOH) and Environmental Conservation (DEC), and many expressions of public concern with respect to the possibility that the Pfohl Landfill contained hazardous wastes. Defendants' exhibits included the following: 33 &#x2192; An April 15, 1986 letter to DOH from a Cheektowaga Town Councilman requesting an assessment of the Pfohl Landfill and another site, stating that he had observed flows into ditches and drainage channels leading to Ellicott Creek as well as along public highways.... Both locations are of great concern to the Town Board and are a matter of growing public interest. 34 &#x2192; A May 31, 1986 article in The Buffalo News reporting that the Pfohl Landfill was among 194 considered by the state to pose the most serious threat to the public and safety. 35 &#x2192; A December 10, 1986 Memorandum of DEC stating that 36 [a]lthough there is a public health concern, there is no known immediate health danger associated with this site at this time. The warning signs erected address our concerns with public access to the site and to decrease the possibility of public exposure. Nearby property owners are advised to keep children away from site. 37 &#x2192; An October 11, 1988 DEC letter to Concerned Citizen[s], noting that preliminary investigations revealed that 38 the existence of low level radiation has been identified in several areas of the landfill. After consultation with the New York State Department of Health ..., it has been determined that the site in its present state with the levels of radiation currently encountered does not present any immediate threat to public health. 39 &#x2192; An October 14, 1988 article in The Buffalo News describing the above DEC letter and stating that 40 [e]vidence of low-level radiation has led state environmental engineers to caution persons not to enter the Pfohl Brothers landfill, a 120-acre former garbage and industrial waste dump in the northwest corner of Cheektowaga. 41 The article quoted a DEC engineer as stating: 42 We have been assured by the state Health Department that the radiation levels pose no threat to the public,.... But as an added safety precaution, we are sending letters to area residents and businesses asking them to avoid the site. 43 &#x2192; A November 2, 1989 article in The Buffalo News stating that a state expert reported `very, very minimal risk' but that DEC officials cautioned people to avoid the area where warnings had been posted. 44 &#x2192; An April 22, 1990 article in the suburban Buffalo Metro Community News reporting that [o]ne of the area's top biologists had criticized the methodology of DEC's studies. 45 &#x2192; An August 1990 announcement by DOH of a public meeting in Cheektowaga to discuss the health assessments relating to the Landfill and the studies being conducted by DOH; the announcement also stated that DOH official Dr. James Melius would be available for individual consultations to discuss [the resident's] health concerns as they relate to the Pfohl Brothers Landfill. 46 &#x2192; An October 24, 1990 article in The Buffalo News reporting that tests showed lead levels at a site adjacent to the Landfill to be in excess of state standards. 47 Defendants noted that a number of concerned citizens of Cheektowaga and neighboring towns had formed committees to gather information about the Pfohl Landfill. In April 1990, one such group, the Pfohl Brothers Landfill Citizen Action Group (later renamed the Pfohl Brothers Landfill Cleanup Committee (Cleanup Committee)), announced a public meeting to be held on April 24, 1990, to question the level of danger from chemical contamination at the Pfohl Landfill. The announcement stated that Luella Kenny, former Love Canal resident, will discuss her experiences at Love Canal in the context of our concerns about action on the Pfohl Brothers Landfill. 48 Defendants also submitted a March 1991 report of the Cancer Surveillance Program of DOH's Bureau of Cancer Epidemiology, entitled Cancer Incidence in the Cheektowaga/ Ellicott Creek Area, Erie County, New York for the period 1978-1987 (1991 DOH Report on 1978-1987 Cancer Incidence). The study, undertaken in response to community concerns about cancer patterns in the Cheektowaga/Ellicott Creek area (1991 DOH Report on 1978-1987 Cancer Incidence at 1), focused on three census tracts, Nos. 89.00, 96.00, and 100.01. This report stated that [t]he number of observed cancer cases among females was significantly greater than the number expected ( id. at 2), and that only one of the three census tracts which comprised the study area exhibited a significant excess of breast cancer cases (census tract 100.01) ( id. at 6). Although not specified in the report, census tract No. 100.01 included the Pfohl Landfill. 49 In sum, defendants argued that before the end of 1991, the Pfohl Landfill had been the subject of more than 100 newspaper articles, dozens of public meetings, and numerous government reports and letters. Defendants contended that no reasonable person who lived or worked near the Landfill could still have been unaware of the health hazards posed by the Landfill and that the public displays and reports of health concerns were sufficient to put a reasonable person on notice as to the need to investigate such concerns. 50