The state of California has expended millions of dollars to study, plan for, monitor, and respond to impacts already caused, and likely to occur, as a result of global warming. Influenced by their...

The state of California has expended millions of dollars to study, plan for, monitor, and respond to impacts already caused, and likely to occur, as a result of global warming. Influenced by their findings, the state of California decided to sue General Motors and other auto makers. California asserts two causes of action: (1) public nuisance under federal common law; and, alternatively, (2) public nuisance under California law. California wanted to hold each defendant jointly and severally liable for creating, contributing to, and maintaining a public nuisance. The defendants argued that California is improperly attempting to create a new global warming tort that has no legitimate origins in federal or state law. Does California state a valid nuisance claim? If you were an attorney for California, what would you argue to make your point? California v. General Motors Corp., et al., 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 68547 (2007).