7/26/2016 1:14:46 PM

Chris Daniel - District Clerk Harris County

Envelope No. 11829984
By: WILLIE J FRAZIER
Filed: 7/26/2016 1:14:46 PM
CAUSE NO. 2012-66308

JIM HARPSTER AND JENNIFER IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF

HARPSTER, ET AL., Plaintiffs,

v. HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS

INTERNATIONAL PAPER COMPANY,
McGINNES INDUSTRIAL
MAINTENANCE CORPORATION,
WASTE MANAGEMENT, INC., AND
WASTE MANAGEMENT OF TEXAS,
INC., Defendants. 11TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

PLAINTIFFS ELEVENTH AMENDED PETITION

TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:

This case should be governed in accordance with the Discovery Control Plan found in

The Civil Rule 190.4 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure (Level 3).

Lori Adamson, Individually and a/n/f of Cody Adamson, a Minor; Erin Adamson; Jackie N.

Allen; Ronnie L. Allen; Ronnie and Jackie Allen a/n/f of Ronnie G. Allen, a Minor; Mary Beth

Angel; Eric Arsement; Thomas Askew; Beverly Barnes; Traci J. Barron; Sharon E. Battarbee;

David Beasley; Kristin Beasley, Individually and a/n/f of Haylie Beasley, a Minor; Cheryl Bebee,

Individually and a/n/f of Christopher Maxwell, a Minor; Tony Bell aka Betty Jo Bell and Tonya

Bell; Linda Bellamy; Doyce R. Bobo; RaeNell C. Bobo; Linda Bonner; John Bonta; Pamela

Bonta; Samuel Braun; Tommy Burch, Individually, and on behalf of the Estate of Linda Burch,

Deceased; David Canard; Rhonda Cleaveland; Joanne Dadds; William Dadds, Jr.; Eddie

Damon; Deborah Davis; Sandra Davis; Sarah Davis; Brenda A. Delasbour; Paul Dolan; Nancy

Dubcak; Malinda Durbin; Ginger Dyson; Ashley Ellis; Derrick Ellis; Gail Ellis; Willie Ellis; Robert

K. Erwin; Clarence Eddie Fitts; RayAnn Fitts; Roger Fitts aka Ragen Fitts; Raul Garcia; Brandi

Gonzalez, Individually and a/n/f of Abel Gonzalez, Jr., Maycie Gonzalez, and Victoria Gonzalez,

Minors; Tera Goodrom; Bobby Griffin; Danielle D. Griffin; Grace Hans; Milton Hans; James M.
Page 1 of 30
Harpster, Sr.; James Harpster, Jr., Individually and On Behalf Of The Estate of Hannah

Harpster, a Deceased Minor; Jennifer Harpster; James T. Harrington; Elizabeth Hart, Individually

and a/n/f of Chloe Hart, a Minor; Robert E. Hart; Stephanie Hart, Individually; Shannon Hartis,

Individually and a/n/f of Alyssa Taschery, a Minor; Jack Henderson; Peggy Henderson; Deborah

Hernandez, Individually and a/n/f of James May, II, a Minor; Bradley Hinkle; Frances Hodge;

Kelly Holcomb; Steven D. Holt; David G. Hurt; Donna L. Hurt; Lucy A. Ivey; Steve Ivey; Harvie S.

Jackson; Paul Jackson; Kevin Johnston; Michelle R. A. Johnston; Sharon E. Leake; Helen

Leonard; Timmie J. Lindsey; Bill Linton; Jesse Lloyd; Zoebee Lloyd; Edna Love; Jimmy D. Love;

Sharon Lunsford; Candice N. Marlow, Individually and On Behalf Of The Estate of David Marlow,

Deceased and Trinity L. Marlow, a Minor; Allysa McCall; Mary McKay; Tracy B. McMillin; Betty

Michalsky; Brad Michalsky; Thomas Michalsky; Gail Mills; Jeff Minton, Individually and a/n/f of

Savannah Minton, a Minor; Martina Minton; Karen Morten, Individually and a/n/f of Dawson Cox

and Chloe Cox, Minors; Leonard Morton; Gregory Moss; Cheryl Nunez; Jean A. Nunley; Edward

L. Nunley; Janice M. Paskey; Robert L. Paskey; William Paskey; Barrett Porter; Donald

Pregeant; Deborah Pregeant, Individually and d/b/a 4 Corners B B Q; Charles Rayburn; Joe L.

Sartain; Porter R. Shipley; Sharon Shipp; Miguel Silva, Sr.; Juan A. Silva; Magdalena Silva;

Maria Silva; Miguel Silva, Jr.; Clarence J. Small, Sr.; Tammie E. Sollock; Keli L. Stephenson;

Ernest A. Strokos, Sr.; Ashley Stubbs; Molly N. Stutts; Michael Taylor, Individually and On Behalf

Of The Estate of Eugenia Taylor, Deceased; Shelva Thomas On Behalf Of The Estate of

Elizabeth I. Thomas, Deceased; Sherrill Trammell; Roger A. Voss; Tracy M. Wallace; Eddie

Williams; Ladectria Williams; Ramonia Williams; Tina Williams; Rhonda Wright; Sharon L.

Wright; Jacquelyn Young; Martha Zamarripa;

Luis R. Aldrete; Carlos E. Andrade; Consuelo A. Andrade; Hilda Andrade, Individually and

a/n/f of Roman Andrade, Jr., a Minor; Hilda A. Andrade, Individually and a/n/f of Jionni A.

Page 2 of 30
Gonzalez and Mia A. Gonzalez, Minors; Chelsey A. Bell; Hailey Boggs; Michael D. Boggs; Gina

Bradley; Michelle Bradley, Individually and a/n/f of Landon Hoffman, a Minor; Thomas L. Briggs;

James Burns; Betty A. Byrd; William R. Byrd; Joseph P. Caesar, Individually and On Behalf Of

The Estate of Lois F. Caesar, Deceased; Sara Cantu, Individually and Alex Cantu a/n/f of Alera

Cantu, a Minor; Cathy A. Carrig; Kimberly D. Chhcon; Donald P. Clayton; Halie M. Coleman;

Lucas Cornejo; Travis G. Courvelle; Ana C. Cruz; Armando C. De Leon; Sharon Cummings,

Individually and a/n/f of Doris "LaStarr" Baldwin, a Minor; Lyndia Davis a/n/f of Rocking Kibble, a

Minor; Joshua A. DeHart; Tina DeHart; Flor C. DiCicco; Aryn Ducharme; Felix Espinoza, Jr.;

Brenda J. Farmer; Rodney J. Farmer; Jimmy C. Fry; Fernando Garcia; Jose Garcia; Mayra

Garcia, Individually and a/n/f of Alex Garcia, a Minor; Rocio Garcia; James D. Garrison; Jesus

Gonzalez; Rosalinda Gonzalez; Virginia Gonzalez; Mary Guerra; Sonia Guerra, Individually and

a/n/f of Arianna F. Martinez, a Minor; Deborah Hall; Lisa S. Hames; Martha A. Harrelson;

Stephanie Hart a/n/f of Brendon Stewart, a Minor; Sydney Holliday; Brittany Hopkins, Individually

and a/n/f of Jalissa Toussaint, a Minor; Pricilla Hopkins, Individually and a/n/f of Jeremy

Saucedo, and Jaliyah J. Morales, Minors; Tiffany W. Hopkins; Chris J. Ivey; Frederick R. James;

Rydell Johnson a/n/f of Blessin Johnson, a Minor; Ricky L. Kempf; Rebecca Kornele; Ricky J.

Kornele; Barbara R. Krynik; Belinda LaDay, On Behalf Of The Estate of Dorothy LaDay,

Deceased; Elizabeth Leal-Alvarado, Individually and a/n/f of Elisa L. Alvarado, a Minor; Heriberto

Leal; Bryan Legg; Keith A. Legg; Kyle D. Little; Fransisca Mares; Fred Mares, Individually and

a/n/f of Genesis L. Mares, and Ziggy J. Mares, Minors; Juan A. Mares, Sr.; Ricardo Mares; Ruth

M. Mares; Sandra P. Mares, Individually and a/n/f of Brianna J. Mares, Juan A. Mares, Jr., and

Scarlett G. Mares, Minors; Ana R. Martinez a/n/f of Fernando Ramos, a Minor; Arleth A.

Martinez, a/n/f of Annais Castro, and Anthony Castro, Minors; Diana Martinez, Individually and

a/n/f of Jacob Chhuon and Joshua Chhuon, Minors; Eva N. Martinez; Fernando Martinez;

Page 3 of 30
Fernando Martinez De Los Santos; Fernando Martinez, Jr.; Isaac A. Martinez; Joseph X.

Martinez; Juana Martinez; Mario A. Martinez; Rosa I. Martinez a/n/f of Edwin I. Martinez, a Minor;

Kenneth McCann, Sr.; Lena M. McCann; Brian O. McCauley; Santiago Mejia; Santiago Mejia De

Leon; Maria De Jesus Mejia; Bertha I. Meullion; Lydia Mindiola; Valerie Moore; Susan M. Mooso;

Anthony J. Mottin; Teresa A. Nieves; Cristian Ochoa; Silvia Ochoa, Individually and a/n/f of Karlo

G. Ochoa, and Mario A. Ochoa, Minors; Phelitria Barnes Olliviere a/n/f of Chayse W. Todd, a

Minor; Janet W. Parks; Joel S. Parrish; Moises Perez a/n/f of Noah I. Perez, a Minor; Brandi B.

Perry; Marisela Ramirez, Individually and a/n/f of Mareli Ramirez, and Nayely Ramirez, Minors;

Dulce C. Rangel, Individually and a/n/f of Amy Silguero, Anahi Silguero, Diana Cornejo, Diana C.

Valdez, Lizbeth Lopez, Sabina Cornejo, and Valentina Valdez, Minors; Charles A. Reeves;

Christopher R. Reeves; Debra Reeves; Guadalupe Rivera, Individually and a/n/f of Elijah N.

Rivera, and Johanna Rivera, Minors; Robert Rivera, Individually and a/n/f of Robert N. Rivera, a

Minor; Lisa Rollins; Mary L. Rouse, Individually and a/n/f of Chance D. Rouse, Incapacitated;

Vivian Salazar a/n/f of Amelia Gutierrez, Ava Morales, and Ryan Gutierrez, Minors; Myra

Sanchez, Individually and a/n/f of Anthony Flores, Cristian Sanchez, Oswald Flores, and Ulises

Sanchez, Minors; Jennifer Sanders a/n/f of Ryan Sanders, a Minor; Mikel W. Sanford; Maria Y.

Schaeffer, Individually and a/n/f of Adrian Schaeffer, Christian A. Schaeffer, and Jonathan

Schaeffer, Minors; Michael A. Schaeffer; Nerissa L. Show, Individually and a/n/f of Aanaiyah B.

Show, and Matthew S. Show, Minors; Kamisha M. Simien-Davis On Behalf Of The Estate of

Vicky R. Tims, Deceased; Carole Singleton, Individually and a/n/f of Jacqueline Leonard, Jada

Leonard, and Shomari Leonard, Minors; Stephen Smith; Esthela Sixtos; Adrianne M. Stevens,

Individually and a/n/f of Justin T. Stevens, and Kyle Stevens, Minors; Brianna Terry; Betty Epps

Tillis; John P. Tims; Ronnie Tims; Vanessa M. Torres, Individually and a/n/f of Christian J.

Torres, a Minor; Glen D. Troha; Kevin J. Trowbridge; Daniel Valenzuela; Rogelio Valenzuela;

Page 4 of 30
Maria L. Vazquez, Individually and a/n/f of Uriel Perez, a Minor; Terry Vinson; Lori E. Walker-

Rollins; Robert Walker, Jr.; Robert K. Walker; Yanina Walker a/n/f of Jasiya Johnson, a Minor;

Donna R. Wallace; Jahenea L. Wardell; Linda D. Webb; Ouida W. Wendt; Wallace H. Wilson;

Dorothy Woods; Linda K. Woods; John Zaruba, Jr.; John Zaruda, Sr.; Patricia Zaruba,

Individually and a/n/f of Autumn Zaruba, and Gabriel W. Zaruba, Minors; (collectively referred to

herein as Plaintiffs), complaining of International Paper Company, McGinnes Industrial

Maintenance Corporation, Waste Management, Inc. and Waste Management of Texas, Inc.,

Defendants, and for cause of action would show:

I. PARTIES

1. Plaintiffs are all individuals who reside or have resided in Channelview, Baytown, or

Highlands, Harris County, Texas, and either own or lease real property in the area or have

owned or leased real property in the area and/or have utilized the San Jacinto River for food and

recreation.

2. International Paper Company (International Paper), successor to Champion

Papers, Inc. (Champion), is a foreign corporation incorporated in the State of New York.

International Paper has been served with process in this action and filed a written answer.

3. McGinnes Industrial Maintenance Corporation (MIMC) is a corporation organized

and existing under the laws of the State of Texas. MIMC principal place of business is Houston,

Texas. It is wholly owned and controlled by Waste Management of Texas, Inc., which is owned

by Waste Management, Inc. MIMC has been served with process in this action and filed a

written answer.

4. Waste Management, Inc., (WMI) is a foreign corporation incorporated in the State

of Delaware with its principal place of business in Houston, Texas. WMI has its principal place of

business in Texas, as it maintains its corporate offices in Houston, Texas. These offices contain
Page 5 of 30
WMIs high level officers where they direct, control and coordinate its activities. WMI has been

served with process in this action and filed a written answer.

5. Waste Management of Texas, Inc., (WMOT) is a corporation organized and

existing under the laws of the State of Texas. WMOT has its principal place of business in

Houston, Texas. WMOT owns 100% of the stock of MIMCand has had during relavent time

periods common directors for both companies as shown below:

MIMC directors:

Gregory T. Sangalis- May 1, 1999 through July 29, 1999

Bryan J. Blankfield - July 29, 1999 through February 1, 2011

David Steiner - February 1, 2001 through July 1, 2003

Linda Smith - July 1, 2003 through February 27, 2009

WMOT directors:

Gregory T. Sangalis - May 1, 1999 through July 29, 1999

Bryan J. Blankfield - July 29, 1999 through February 1, 2011

David P. Steiner - February 1, 2001 through July 1, 2003

Linda J. Smith - July 1, 2003 through February 27, 2009

WMOT has been served with process in this action and filed a written answer.

II. VENUE

6. Venue is proper in Harris County, Texas, pursuant to 15.002 (c)(3) of the Texas

Civil Practice and Remedies Code, because the properties that are subject to this action are

located in Harris County, Texas, and all or part of the actions made the basis of this suit

occurred in Harris County, Texas.

Page 6 of 30
 III. INTRODUCTION

7. For decades Defendants have released, discharged, stored, disposed of, and/or

dumped dangerous and hazardous substances, including dioxins, furans, PCBs, and other

congeners and pollutants, into the waters of the San Jacinto River (the River). The origins of

this case go back to the 1960s. In September 1965, Defendant MIMC acquired an exclusive

waste disposal contract to dispose of waste from Champions paper mill in Pasadena, Texas.

Champions paper mill produced tens of thousands of gallons of toxic wastewater per day and

millions of gallons per year that Champion disposed of either in waste ponds it constructed or by

discharging the waste water directly into the River.

8. Champion conspired to have some of its waste dumped into ponds built on tracts

of land located in an area near where the Interstate Highway 10 (I-10) bridge crosses over the

River, east of the City of Houston between the areas known as Channelview and Highlands and

Baytown, Texas, and includes areas generally referred to as the Northern Impoundment and

Southern Impoundment (together, also known as the Site). These ponds were built and/or

controlled by MIMC. The Plaintiffs named herein reside or have resided on property adjacent to

the Site and/or utilized the River as a source for food and recreation. MIMC constructed waste

ponds on the Site so that they were directly adjacent to, and jutting out into, the River. Records

indicate that the waste ponds were frequently inundated by the River. Records also indicate that

MIMCs only containment measure was to separate the toxic wastewater and sludge from the

waters of the River by erecting earthen embankments (levees), which leaked and deteriorated

rapidly, permitting the toxic wastewater and sludge within to be continuously discharged and

released into the River. Records also indicate that MIMC discharged the waste directly into the

River, and/or conspired with Champion to dispose of it in such a way that it could seep into soil

and groundwater on and around the Site.

Page 7 of 30
 9. For years, MIMC transported wastewater and sludge to the Sites unlined ponds,

where the toxic wastewater and sludge was stored until it seeped, released, or was discharged

into the River or returned to Champions paper mill where it would eventually be released into the

River. MIMC removed and transported paper mill wastewater and sludge, along with its

contaminants, to the Site at the direction of Champion and/or took control and legal responsibility

for Champions wastewater and sludge that was present at the Site. According to reports at the

time, MIMC and Champion planned to store the wastewater and sludge from the Champion

paper mill for a year before discharging it into the River.

10. Champion and MIMC had no reasonable plan for handling and containing the

waste residue from Champions paper manufacturing, and the hundreds of thousands of cubic

yards of that residue that was contaminated with dioxins, furans, PCBs, and other congeners

and pollutants. MIMC and Champion left the waste and residue in waste ponds at the Site where

it still remains today, to the extent that it has not already leached into the surrounding soil and

water. On the land north of I-10 (the Northern Impoundment), the waste is spread out over

acres with portions of the waste ponds just above the water line and portions of the waste ponds

having been submerged below the waters of the River for decades. Defendants agents installed

a cap on the Northern Impoundment in 2010 in an attempt to contain releases of the

contaminants and congeners, but the cap has not successfully done so. The cap has had

numerous breaches resulting in continued contamination of the River up to and including the

present time. On the land south of I-10 (the Southern Impoundment), Defendants conspired to

directly discharge the contaminants and congeners into the River and/or conceal the waste

below ground, allowing it to seep into the groundwater, soil and River over a period of decades

unbeknownst to the residents in the area and the general public. To Plaintiffs knowledge,

Page 8 of 30
Defendants have made no efforts to remediate or contain the waste and contamination emitting

from the Southern Impoundment.

11. Not only did toxic waste seep from the ponds into the River, records show that

MIMC and Champion intentionally pumped liquid waste out of one or more of the ponds at the

Site, directly into the River. MIMC and Champion were ordered to stop discharging waste from

the ponds into the River, but subsequent records show that toxic waste continued to seep from

the ponds. Further, the ponds levees at the Northern Impoundment have deteriorated, causing

the continuous release of toxic waste into the River and the surrounding area over the following

years and decades. The waste at the Southern Impoundment has leached into the soil,

groundwater, and River.

12. As early as 1965, MIMC was aware that water seepage was occurring along the

waste ponds levees on the Northern Impoundment and that the levees needed repair and

reinforcement. Nevertheless, MIMC continued to store and discharge the toxic waste at the Site

until at least 1968.

13. Despite having conspired with MIMC and others to dump millions of gallons of their

toxic wastewater and sludge into waste ponds at the Site, Champion (and its successor in

interest International Paper) took no action for the next 40 years to deal with the contamination

the paper mill had caused. Likewise, despite accepting, transporting, and/or controlling millions

of gallons of toxic wastewater and sludge through transporting the wastewater and sludge to the

Site and maintaining the wastewater and sludge at the Site, MIMC (and its successors in

interest) took no action for decades to deal with the contamination at the Site.

14. Throughout the 1960s and beyond, MIMC took no action to repair the levees at the

Northern Impoundment or to prevent the Sites toxic waste from seeping into soil and

groundwater or being discharged into the River. MIMC and Champion took no action to warn the

Page 9 of 30
public of the dangers of the Site or of the dangers of ingesting crabs, fish, and other ecological

receptors of dioxins, furans, PCBs, and other congeners and pollutants. Furthermore, MIMC and

Champion took no action to warn the public of the dangers of the toxic waste quietly seeping into

the surrounding areas and the waters of the River and Galveston Bay. MIMC and Champion did

nothing to abate or remove the toxic waste, and its associated contaminants, located at the Site,

nor did MIMC take any action to prevent the ongoing deterioration of the Northern Impoundment

ponds levees whether they were above or below the water line.

15. Through several corporate acquisitions and mergers, MIMC was acquired by

WMOT and WMI:

1992: GC Environmental acquires MIMC;

1992: EnvirX acquires GC Environmental, and changes name of EnvirX to TransAmerican

Waste Industries, Inc.;

1998: TransAmerican Waste Industries, Inc. merges with USA Waste;

1998: USA merges with WMI, under the name WMI, Inc.;

1998: GC Environmental merges into WMOT.Following these acquisitions and mergers,

WMOT and WMI took such control over MIMC and its leadership, operations and capital, that

MIMC ceased to be a legally separete corporate entity, and WMOT and WMI became the alter

egos of MIMC. For example, when MIMC was required to contribute $13 million to clean-up

activities in connection with SuperFund proceedings, WMOT or WMI funded 100% of those

expenses on behalf of MIMC.WMOT and WMI were aware, or should have been aware, of the

toxic waste and deteriorating conditions at the Site, yet did nothing to remove the toxic waste,

including its associated contaminants, or to prevent its further release or discharge into the

waters of the River. WMOT and WMI also took no action to warn the public of the contamination

Page 10 of 30
and dangers of ingesting crabs, fish, and other ecological receptors of dioxins, furans, PCBs,

and other congeners and pollutants.

16. International Paper merged with Champion in 2000 and became the corporate

successor to Champion, accepting and assuming all of Champions responsibilities and liabilities.

At no point after merging with Champion did International Paper undertake any effort to clean up

or remediate the contamination at the Site which was the result of Champions toxic waste that

had been dumped and left abandoned at the Site.

17. Defendants have had internal corporate divisions and/or staff tasked with

monitoring and/or collecting information regarding safety, health, and environmental matters

during the time of the waste operations and since that time. Defendants either failed to act on

their internal and collected information, monitoring, and/or data in a way that fulfilled their non-

delegable duties, and/or failed to conduct their safety, health, environmental monitoring, reviews,

and processes in a way that fulfilled those same duties.

18. MIMC and Champion conspired with each other to release, discharge, store, dump,

and/or abandon toxic waste at the Site and then to remain silent about its abandonment. MIMC

and Champions agreement and decision to leave toxic waste unattended and unprotected both

caused and allowed dioxins, furans, PCBs, and other congeners and pollutants to seep and

migrate into the River and Galveston Bay.

19. MIMC and Champion also conspired to return waste water from the waste ponds

that contained contaminants to Champions paper mill. This second-generation waste water also

made its way to the River through releases and seepage.

20. MIMC ultimately abandoned the leaking ponds full of toxic waste and left the Site

unattended and unprotected, causing and allowing dioxins, furans, PCBs, and other congeners

and pollutants to quietly seep and migrate even further into the surrounding environment. Thus,

Page 11 of 30
the ponds levees on the Northern Impoundment were not maintained, and the releases of toxic

waste already occurring at the Site was not stopped or mitigated. Further, no action was taken to

remove the toxic, solid waste residue that Champion and MIMC conspired to dump at the Site.

Although Champion and MIMC physically abandoned these waste pits, this action did not

alleviate their on-going responsibility to maintain the waste and control pollution from the waste.

21. Champion and MIMC also maintained a larger business relationship beyond

activities related to the Site. They continued to be in communication and maintain a business

relationship after the abandonment of the Site, and agreed to take no steps to contain or

maintain the Site as required by their non-delegable duties.

22. MIMC did nothing to prevent portions of the waste ponds on the Northern

Impoundment, which were full of toxic waste, from submerging below the water level of the

River, thereby allowing a continuous release of dioxins, furans, PCBs, and other congeners and

pollutants into the water. MIMC also did nothing to contain or effectively remove the waste on

the Southern Impoundment to prevent it from discharging into the soil, groundwater and River,

and in fact, sought instead to purposely discharge some of this waste directly into the River. The

release of these contaminants and congeners is on-going to the present day. MIMC inaction

and failure to take care of the toxic waste it dumped at the Site resulted in toxic waste being

released and discharged directly and continuously into the River for more than 45 years,

polluting the River and Galveston Bay with dioxins, furans, PCBs, and other congeners and

pollutants. During all times relevant to this lawsuit, Defendants neglected to take any action to

protect or warn the public (including Plaintiffs) of the dangers and hazards of the toxic waste

emitted and stored at the Site.

23. Decades later, various studies conducted by Texas state agencies revealed

startling data showing that fish and shellfish tissue samples taken from the San Jacinto River

Page 12 of 30
contained unusually high levels of contaminants and congeners. For example, these agencies

found dioxin that exceeded the health-based standard in 97% of fish samples and 95% of crab

samples. Because of these health risks, the State of Texas issued a consumption advisory for

crab and all species of fish from the area of the River along the Site, warning women who are

nursing, pregnant, or who may become pregnant, and children under 12 not to consume any fish

or blue crab from the area. All others are advised to consume no more than eight ounces of

certain fish within any given month. Adults and children are also advised to avoid the risk of

exposure through skin contact by not camping, fishing, or picnicking near the Site.

24. Further testing and chemical analysis confirm that both human and ecological

health is threatened by releases of toxic waste from the Site and that Champions toxic waste

continues to migrate from the waste ponds into the River. Defendants have exposed Plaintiffs to

toxic waste and placed them in harms way. For example, humans can be dangerously exposed

to dioxins, furans and PCBs through: (1) direct dermal contact with contaminated sediment or

water; (2) human ingestion of contaminated sediment or water; (3) human inhalation of

contaminated sediment or water; (4) human direct dermal contact with contaminated ecological

receptors; (5) human ingestion of contaminated ecological receptors; (6) and ecological

bioaccumulation of contaminants at every trophic level of the food chain. Ecological receptors

include fish, birds, mammals, amphibians, reptiles, macro-invertebrates, and plants. Defendants

exposed Plaintiffs through some or all of these methods.

25. On June 19, 2015, the Texas Department of State Health Services released an

assessment showing more cases of certain types of cancer than expected in the areas adjacent

to the Site. The findings in the assessment identified a greater-than-expected incidence of

childhood glioma, melanoma, lymphoma, and retinoblastoma. Additionally, the assessment

found more cases than expected of brain and cervical cancer.

Page 13 of 30
 26. One of the pollutants at issue is 2, 3, 7, 8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (2, 3, 7, 8-

TCDD) a type of dioxin widely regarded as the most toxic chemical ever made by man. The U.S.

Department of Health and Human Services has determined that 2, 3, 7, 8-TCDD may reasonably

be anticipated to cause cancer, and the World Health Organization has determined that 2, 3, 7,

8-TCDD is a human carcinogen. In humans, the most common health effect from 2, 3, 7, 8-

TCDD is chloracne, a severe skin disease. Studies have also shown that dioxin may cause

changes to blood and urine that may indicate liver damage, alter glucose metabolism, and

change hormone levels. In certain animal species, 2, 3, 7, 8-TCDD is especially harmful and can

cause death after a single exposure, in addition to immune system disorders, liver damage,

reproductive damage, and birth defects. There are multiple other dioxin, furan and PCB

congeners that make up the contamination and pollution at and from this site, which cause and

contribute to cause similar and other serious illness and physical injuries.

27. Contaminants from the Site have pervaded the entire neighborhood adjacent to the

Site where Plaintiffs live, participate in recreation, and/or own property, causing significant

mental and physical injuries, illnesses, or conditions and greatly impairing their health, mental

well-being, property values, and quality of life. MIMC and Champion unreasonably dumped toxic

waste into an area where it would discharge or seep into the River, soil and groundwater, and

thus slowly seep into Plaintiffs neighborhood and property. Defendants conduct and actions,

though occurring many years ago, have only now begun to substantially interfere with Plaintiffs

physical and mental health, the use and enjoyment of their homes and property, and

depreciation in the market value of their real property, which is all an inevitable result of the

unreasonable disposal of Champions toxic waste. Defendants conduct is unlawful,

unreasonable, abnormal, non-prudent, and offensive to civilized society, and it constitutes a

private and public nuisance by virtue of its affect upon Plaintiffs real property interests and their

Page 14 of 30
respective ability to fully enjoy the use of their property, which includes damages that are distinct

from the general public.

IV. CAUSES OF ACTION

A. Negligence of MIMC, Waste Management, and WMOT

28. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the foregoing paragraphs as if fully stated herein.

29. Beginning on or before 1965 and continuing thereafter, MIMC handled,

transported, disposed of, dumped, stored and/or controlled toxic waste from the Champion paper

mill at the Site. The wastewater and sludge from the Champion paper mill was toxic, hazardous,

and included dioxins, furans, PCBs, and other congeners and pollutants. Beginning on or before

1965 and continuing thereafter, MIMC facilitated, directed, allowed, permitted, and/or caused this

wastewater and sludge from the Champion paper mill to be handled, transported, disposed of,

dumped, and/or stored at the Site.

30. MIMC had a non-delegable duty to use due care in constructing, maintaining, and

operating the Site. MIMC also had a non-delegable duty to transport, handle, and store in a safe

manner the toxic waste from the Champion paper mill. MIMC had a non-delegable duty of care

to remove the toxic waste from the Site and to prevent the discharge or release of the toxic

waste deposited at the Site into the surrounding area, the waters of the River, and Galveston

Bay. MIMC had a non-delegable duty to prevent, mitigate, and avoid endangering the health and

livelihood of Plaintiffs by the discharge or release of toxic waste into the surrounding areas, the

waters of the River, and Galveston Bay. MIMC had a duty to warn Plaintiffs and the public of the

dangers emanating from the storage, discharge, or release of toxic waste from the Site into the

surrounding areas, the waters of the River, and Galveston Bay. MIMC breached its duties of care

by:

a. Failing to construct and operate the Site in a safe and prudent manner;
Page 15 of 30
 b. Dumping toxic waste into the waste ponds at the Site and directly into the
River;

c. Failing to construct or monitor the waste ponds at the Site to prevent toxic
waste, including dioxins, furans, PCBs, and other congeners and pollutants,
from being released into the River and the area surrounding the Site;

d. Failing to contain and prevent seepage of toxic waste from the waste
ponds;

e. Failing to adequately maintain and/or repair the waste ponds levees on the
Northern Impoundment;

f. Failing to properly inspect the waste ponds levees on the Northern

Impoundment;

g. Failing to abate or remove toxic waste located at the Site;

h. Abandoning the Site, thereby allowing toxic waste, including dioxins, furans,
PCBs, and other congeners and pollutants, to be continuously released and
discharged;

i. Failing to sample and test the waste ponds to detect existence of toxic
substances such as dioxins, furans, PCBs, and other congeners and
pollutants;

j. Concealing and failing to warn and disclose to Plaintiffs and to the public of
the dangers emanating from the discharge or release of toxic waste from
the Site; and

k. Failing to prevent, mitigate, and avoid endangering the health and livelihood
of Plaintiffs by the discharge or release of toxic waste into the surrounding
areas and the waters of the River and Galveston Bay.

31. WMOT and Waste Management are successors in interest to MIMC and are

responsible and liable for all of MIMC conduct at the Site. In addition, WMOT and Waste

Management have had control over MIMC since acquiring MIMC in 1992. Since the acquisition,

WMOT and Waste Management have had control over significant portions of the Site and have

failed to take any action to remove or abate the contamination or to disclose to the public the

dangers associated with the toxic waste emanating from the Site.

Page 16 of 30
 32. In addition to WMOTs and WMIs liability for MIMC breaches of its duties of care,

WMOT and WMI directly breached their own duty to exercise reasonable care when their

conduct created a risk of physical harm by:

a. Failing to monitor the waste ponds to prevent toxic waste from being
released into the River and the area surrounding the Site;

b. Failing to contain and prevent seepage of toxic waste from the waste ponds;

c. Failing to adequately maintain and/or repair the waste pond levees on the
Northern Impoundment;

d. Failing to properly inspect the waste pond levees on the Northern

Impoundment;

e. Failing to abate or remove toxic waste located at the Site;

f. Leaving the Site unmonitored and abandoned thereby allowing toxic waste,
including dioxins, furan, PCBs, and other congeners and pollutants, to be
continuously released and discharged;

g. Failing to sample and test the waste ponds to detect existence of toxic
substances such as dioxins, furans, PCBs, and other congeners and
pollutants;

h. Concealing and failing to warn and disclose to Plaintiffs and to the public of
the dangers emanating from the discharge or release of toxic waste from
the Site;

i. Failing to prevent, mitigate, and avoid endangering the health and livelihood
of Plaintiffs by the discharge or release of toxic waste into the surrounding
areas, the waters of the River, and Galveston Bay; and

j. Failing to perform their due diligence in acquiring MIMC in a reasonable

manner through which they would have learned of problems at the Site,
and/or by not giving adequate attention to and/or ignoring problems at the
Site that were made apparent in the course of the due diligence that they
did perform.

B. Negligence of International Paper

33. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the foregoing paragraphs as if fully state herein.

Page 17 of 30
 34. Defendant International Paper is the successor in interest to Champion, who

arranged for the disposal or treatment of toxic waste, which was owned or possessed by said

company, at the Site. The toxic waste owned and generated by Champion was released and

discharged from the Site into the waters of the River and Galveston Bay.

35. As successor to Champion, International Paper assumed the responsibilities and

liabilities of Champion, including those arising from the Champion paper mill. Beginning on or

before 1965 and continuing thereafter, Defendant International Paper (as successor of

Champion) facilitated, directed, allowed, permitted and/or caused wastewater and sludge from

the Champion paper mill to be handled, transported, disposed of, dumped, and/ or stored and

concealed at the Site. The wastewater and sludge from the Champion paper mill was toxic,

hazardous, and included dioxins, furans, PCBs, and other congeners and pollutants.

36. International Paper had a non-delegable duty in the safe removal, transport, and

storage of Champions toxic waste at the Site. International Paper had a non-delegable duty of

care to remove the toxic waste from the Site. International Paper had a non-delegable duty to

prevent, mitigate, and avoid endangering the health and livelihood of Plaintiffs by the storage of

toxic waste at the Site or by the discharge or release of toxic waste into the surrounding area,

the waters of the River, and Galveston Bay. International Paper had the duty to warn Plaintiffs

and the public of the dangers emanating from the storage of toxic waste at the Site or the

discharge or release of toxic waste from the Site into the surrounding areas, the water of the

River, and Galveston Bay.

37. International Paper breached its duties of care by:

a. Allowing its toxic waste to be dumped into the waste ponds at the Site
and/or directly into the River;

Page 18 of 30
 b. Failing to monitor the waste ponds at the Site or to ensure safe storage to
prevent toxic waste from being released into the River and the surrounding
area;

c. Failing to abate or remove toxic waste located at the Site;

d. Failing to sample and test the waste ponds or waste to detect the existence
of toxic substances such as including dioxins, furans, PCBs, and other
congeners and pollutants;

e. Concealing and failing to warn and disclose to Plaintiffs and to the public of
the dangers emanating from the storage of waste at the Site or the
discharge or release of toxic waste from the Site; and

f. Failing to prevent, mitigate, and avoid endangering the health and livelihood
of Plaintiffs by the discharge or release of toxic waste into the surrounding
areas, the waters of the River, and Galveston Bay.
C. Negligence per se

38. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the foregoing paragraphs as if fully stated herein.

39. Defendants acts and omissions as set forth above constitute negligence per se.

Defendants violated the following statutes:

a. Texas Water Quality Act.

i. Vernons Tex. Civ. Stat. art. 7621d, 9 (eff. Nov. 1, 1962). It shall
hereafter be unlawful for any person to throw, drain, run or otherwise
discharge into the waters of this State or to cause, permit or suffer to
be thrown, run, drained, allowed to seep or otherwise enter such
waters any waste . . . that shall cause a condition of pollution.
ii. Texas Water Quality Act of 1967, Vernons Tex. Civ. Stat. art.
7621d-1, 14 (eff. Sept. 1, 1967) (repealing Vernons Tex. Civ. Stat.
art. 7621d). It shall hereafter be unlawful for any person to throw,
drain, run, or otherwise discharge into the waters in this state, or to
cause, permit, or suffer to be thrown, run, drained, allowed to seep,
or otherwise enter such waters, any waste, unless pursuant to and in
accordance with a then existing permit, that shall cause a condition
of pollution.
iii. Texas Water Quality Act, Vernons Tex. Civ. Stat. art. 7621d-1,
4.01 (eff. Sept. 1, 1969) (codified as amended Tex. Water Code
26.121).

(a) [Except as authorized], no person may:

Page 19 of 30
 (1) discharge . . . industrial waste into or adjacent to any
water in the state;
(2) discharge other waste into or adjacent to any water in
the state which in itself, or in conjunction with any
other discharge or activity, causes, continues to
cause, or will cause pollution of any of the water in the
state; or
(3) commit any other act or engage in any other activity,
which in itself, or in conjunction with any other
discharge or activity, causes, continues to cause, or
will cause pollution of any of the water in the state,
unless under the jurisdiction of [specified state
agencies].
* * *
(c) No person may cause, suffer, allow, or permit the discharge
of any waste or the performance of any activity in violation of
this Act or of any rule, regulation, permit, or other order of the
1
[Texas Water Quality Board].

b. Texas Solid Waste Disposal Act (for violations on or after December 31,
1975).

i. Texas Solid Waste Disposal Act (SWDA), Vernons Ann. Tex. Civ.
St. art. 4477-7, 8(a) (eff. Sept. 1, 1969). No person may cause,
suffer, allow or permit the collection, storage, handling or disposal of
solid waste, or the use or operation of a site for the disposal of solid
waste, in violation of this Act or of the rules, regulations, permits,
licenses or other orders of the ... [Texas Water Quality Board]. 2

1 In 1971, the Texas Water Code was adopted and the Texas Water Quality Act was codified, without
substantive revision, into chapter 21 of the Water Code. Section 4.01s prohibition against unauthorized
discharges became section 21.251 of the Water Code. In 1977, the Texas Water Quality Act was moved to
Chapter 26 of the Water Code, with section 21.251s prohibition against unauthorized discharges moved to its
present location in section 26.121. Since 1977, no amendments material to Plaintiffs claims have been made to
the pertinent definitions or section 26.121s prohibition against unauthorized discharges.
2 Over the years, the name of the state agency charged with adopting and promulgating rules and orders
pursuant to the SWDA changed a number of times:
1969 Texas Water Quality Board
1977 Texas Department of Water Resources
1985 Texas Water Commission
1991 Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission
2002 Texas Commission on Environmental Quality
In 1989, the Health and Safety Code was adopted and the SWDA was codified, without substantive revision, into
chapter 361 of the Safety Code. The prohibition of section 8(a) was codified into section 361.223. In 1997, a
number of sections of the Safety Code were repealed, including section 361.223. However, the prohibition of
section 361.223 was reenacted in section 7.101 of the Water Code (A person may not cause, suffer, allow, or
Page 20 of 30
 ii. Texas Water Quality Board Order No. 75-1125-1, 1.04 (eff. Dec.
31, 1975) (issued pursuant to the Boards authority under the
SWDA).
Prohibitions. This Regulation prohibits the collection handling,
storage and/or disposal of industrial solid wastes in such manner so
as to cause:
1. The discharge or imminent threat of discharge of waste into
or adjacent to the ground or surface waters of the state,
[except pursuant to permit];
2. The creation or maintenance of a nuisance;
3. The endangerment of the public health and welfare; and/or
4. The disposal of industrial solid waste in an unauthorized site
by either the generator or the carrier.
iii. Tex. Admin. Code tit. 30, 335.4 (eff. May 29, 1986) (issued by the
Texas Water Commission pursuant to its authority under the
SWDA).
General Prohibitions. [N]o person may cause, suffer, allow, or permit
the collection, handling, storage, processing, or disposal of industrial
solid waste ... in such a manner so as to cause:
1. the discharge or imminent threat of discharge of industrial
solid waste ... into or adjacent to the waters in the state,
[except with permission];
2. the creation and maintenance of a nuisance; or
3. the endangerment of the public health and welfare.

c. The Texas Hazardous Substances Spill Prevention and Control Act (for
violations after July 3, 1985, as to dioxins, and for violations after June 19,
1975 as to PCBs and any other hazardous substances in the waste)
(against all Defendants except International Paper), as follows:

i. Tex. Water Code 21.806 (eff. June 19, 1975).

Removal of Accidental Discharge.
(a) Any person discharging or spilling oil or hazardous substances
into coastal waters shall immediately undertake all feasible actions
to abate and remove the discharge or spill subject to applicable
federal and state requirements.

permit a violation of a statute within the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commissions jurisdiction or a
rule adopted or an order or permit issued under such a statute.).

Page 21 of 30
 ii. Tex. Water Code 26.266 (eff. Sept. 1, 1983).
Removal of Accidental Discharge.
(a) Any person discharging or spilling hazardous substances into
surface waters shall immediately undertake all feasible actions to
abate and remove the discharge or spill subject to applicable federal
and state requirements.

iii. Tex. Water Code 26.266 (as amended, eff. Sept. 1, 1985).
Removal of Spill or Discharge.
(a) Any owner, operator ... or person in charge of ... any on-shore
facility ... shall immediately undertake all reasonable actions to abate
and remove the discharge or spill subject to applicable federal and
state requirements.

40. As owners, residents, or recreational users of property adjacent to the River where

the Site is located, Plaintiffs belong to the class that the above statutes were intended to protect,

and Plaintiffs have suffered damages from the diminution of the market value of their real

property, depletion of fish stock and wild life, and exposures to pollutants such as dioxin, furan,

PCB, and other congeners and pollutants, which are the type of injuries these statutes were

designed to prevent.

D. Public Nuisance

41. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the foregoing paragraphs as if fully stated herein.

42. Defendants caused, permitted, and/or facilitated the storage and discharge of toxic

waste at the Site in such a manner as to create a public nuisance and endanger the health and

livelihood of Plaintiffs. Defendants conduct also harmed the health, safety, and welfare of the

public. The release and discharge of toxic waste into the waters of the River and Galveston Bay

resulted in an unreasonable interference with the right of the public to participate in recreation,

including, but not limited to, fishing, swimming, crabbing, boating, skiing, and tubing in the waters

owned by the State. Defendants conduct resulted in an unreasonable interference with the

Page 22 of 30
rights of Plaintiffs to participate in recreation, including, but not limited to, fishing, swimming,

crabbing, boating, skiing, and tubing in the waters of the River and Galveston Bay.

43. Plaintiffs acquired, purchased, or leased property in the neighborhoods adjacent to

the Site for the specific advantage of having comfortable and affordable access to the public

waters of the River and Galveston Bay. The release and discharge of toxic waste into said

waters has caused substantial harm to Plaintiffs, particularly impacting and interfering with their

unique access to the public waters of the River and Galveston Bay, which is not shared by the

general public, as well as their health.

44. Multiple Plaintiffs, including Greg Moss, have had their business interests impacted

by Defendants conduct and the presence of the Site along with its associated pollution. For

example, Plaintiff Greg Moss is in the business of boat repair and maintenance, and, in order to

properly conduct his business, he has been required to physically enter the waters of the River in

areas adjacent to the Site. Defendants conduct has resulted in an unreasonable interference

with the rights of Plaintiff Greg Moss as a business owner who is dependent upon the publics

use of the River and Galveston Bay as well as his own need to enter these waters to conduct his

business. Plaintiff Greg Moss has expended significant time, effort, and capital to create and

maintain his business. Defendants conduct has caused substantial harm to the business

interests of Plaintiff Greg Moss and similarly situated Plaintiffs, which is not shared by the

general public.

E. Private Nuisance

45. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the foregoing paragraphs as if fully state herein.

46. The condition resulting from toxic waste material escaping form the Site into the

San Jacinto River has created a nuisance that substantially interferes with the use and

Page 23 of 30
enjoyment of property by causing unreasonable discomfort or annoyance to persons of ordinary

sensibilities attempting to use and enjoy it.

47. This nuisance has been proximately caused by Defendants intentional and/or

negligent conduct. Alternatively, Defendants are strictly liable for this nuisance because the toxic

wastes that have been allowed to escape constitute an abnormally dangerous substance that

creates a high degree of risk of serious injury.

48. As a result of this nuisance, Plaintiffs have suffered physical damage to their

property, economic harm to the value of their property, harm to their physical health, and

psychological harm to their peace of mind in the use and enjoyment of their property.

F. Civil Conspiracy

49. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the foregoing paragraphs as if fully stated herein.

50. MIMC and International Paper, as the direct successor in interest of Champion are

liable for civil conspiracy in that they were members of a combination of two or more persons,

where the object of such combination was to wrongfully pollute the waters of the River and soil

and groundwater, and to wrongfully store, discharge, or dispose of toxic waste at the Site, in

violation of state law and the duties owed by them to Plaintiffs and further conspired to conceal

the existence and continuing discharge of the waste after its disposal. MIMC and Champion had

a meeting of the minds on their object or course of action, and they committed an unlawful, overt

act to further their object or course of action thus leading to the pollution of the River,

groundwater, and soil. Plaintiffs therefore allege that they have suffered injuries as a proximate

result of MIMC and Champions wrongful act or acts.

G. Fraud by Nondisclosure

51. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the foregoing paragraphs as if fully stated herein.

Page 24 of 30
 52. Plaintiffs allege that Defendants concealed or failed to disclose certain facts to

Plaintiffs pertaining to the disposal, discharge, control and/or storage of toxic waste at the Site.

Defendants had a duty to disclose these facts to Plaintiffs as they were material to Plaintiffs

decisions to purchase real property in the areas adjacent to the Site, to engage in business in,

on, or around the River, or to participate in recreation in, on, or around the River. However,

Defendants deliberately remained silent in light of this duty. Defendants knew, or were in the

best position to know, or should have known that Plaintiffs were ignorant of the facts and that

they did not have an equal opportunity to discover the facts related to the Site.

53. Furthermore, by failing to disclose the facts, Defendants intended to induce

Plaintiffs to refrain from taking action in regards to the activity at the Site or the toxic waste itself,

and/or Defendants intended to induce Plaintiffs to take some action, such as purchasing real

property in the areas adjacent to the Site, which would not have been taken by Plaintiffs if

Defendants had not concealed or failed to disclose certain facts regarding the Site. Plaintiffs

relied on Defendants nondisclosure and were injured as a result of acting without the knowledge

of the undisclosed facts.

H. Trespass to Real Property

54. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the foregoing paragraphs as if fully stated herein.

55. Plaintiffs allege that MIMC and/or International Paper as a direct successor of

Champion caused or permitted pollutants, or aided or encouraged pollutants, including dioxins,

furans, PCBs, and other congeners and pollutants, to enter Plaintiffs property, and this entry

was physical, intentional, and voluntary. Plaintiffs owned or had a lawful right to possess the real

properties at issue. MIMC and/or International Paper as a direct successor of Champion either

intended to commit acts that violated Plaintiffs property rights or that would be practically certain

to violate Plaintiffs property rights, or MIMC and/or International Paper as a direct successor of
Page 25 of 30
Champion intended to commit acts that resulted in the trespass. As a result, MIMC and/or

International Paper as a direct successor of Champions trespass caused injury to Plaintiffs

rights of possession.

VI. DEFENDANTS CONDUCT PROXIMATELY CAUSED PLAINTIFFS INJURIES

56. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the foregoing paragraphs as if fully stated herein.

57. As a proximate result of Defendants conduct, Plaintiffs have been substantially

affected, distressed, and annoyed. Plaintiffs have suffered severe physical and mental

discomfort and ill health due to various degrees of exposure to the toxic waste that was dumped

into the Sites waste ponds and adjacent areas of the Site, which were thereafter not maintained

and subsequently ignored. Such physical illnesses and ailments include, but are not limited to,

chloracne (and other skin disorders), cancer, kidney disease, other maladies, and death.

Plaintiffs allege all the foregoing injuries have caused them to suffer severe pain and mental

anguish and that they will in all reasonable probability continue to have such physical pain and

mental suffering for as long as they suffer from these various diseases and ailments, and as long

as the toxic waste remains at the Site and continues to seep into the environment.

58. Further, as a proximate result of Defendants conduct, Plaintiffs have suffered

damage to their property, real and personal and business. Defendants conduct has caused the

market value of the property to decline, has deprived Plaintiffs of the use of property, and

Plaintiffs have spent substantial sums in attempts to restore property to its previous condition. In

addition, the damage to Plaintiffs property caused by Defendants conduct has resulted in

substantial economic lasses to Plaintiffs due to business interruption.

VII. DEFENDANTS CONDUCT IS ONGOING AND CONTINUOUS

59. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the foregoing paragraphs as if fully stated herein.

Page 26 of 30
 60. The effects of Defendants present and past conduct will continue for an indefinite

period after judgment of this action at the place wherein and the manner by which it is presently

doing so. As a proximate result of such continuation of said effects, Plaintiffs will continue to

suffer physical sickness/ailments, distress, mental anguish, physical discomfort, and death, as

well as damages to property and business, as they have in the past, as alleged.

VIII. REQUEST FOR JURY TRIAL

61. Plaintiffs respectfully request a jury trial in this case, having already tendered the

appropriate jury fee with the Clerk of Court.

IX. DAMAGES

62. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the foregoing paragraphs as if fully stated herein.

63. Defendants conduct as alleged above was the proximate cause of Plaintiffs

injuries. Plaintiffs have suffered actual, special, and consequential damages, which include, but

are not limited to, diminution of the value of their real property interests, interference with the use

and enjoyment of their homes and real property, physical sickness/ailments, distress, mental

anguish, physical discomfort, loss of earning capacity, and loss of use and enjoyment of access

to the surrounding waterways.

64. Plaintiffs have also suffered exposure to pollutants, such as dioxins, furans, PCBs,

and other congeners, through direct dermal or other contact with contaminated sediment, water,

and/or seafood and waterlife.

65. Plaintiffs are also entitled to recover punitive or exemplary damages pursuant to

the Texas Civil Practices and Remedies Code and Texas common law. Defendants conduct

was done knowingly, with actual awareness, malice, and intent, and/or with such an entire want

of care as to indicate that the acts or omissions complained of herein were the result of a

conscious indifference to the rights, welfare, and/or safety of Plaintiffs such that Plaintiffs are
Page 27 of 30
entitled to an award of exemplary or punitive damages commensurate with the facts to be

determined by the jury.

WHEFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Plaintiffs request that International Paper

Company, MIMC Industrial Maintenance Corporation, Waste Management, Inc., and Waste

Management of Texas, Inc., Defendants, be cited to appear and answer, and that upon final

hearing, Plaintiffs have judgment for:

a. Actual damages in excess of the sum of FOUR HUNDRED MILLION

AND NO/100 ($400,000,000.00) with interest as provided by law;

b. Exemplary damages to be decided by the trier of facts;

c. Attorneys fees and costs of suit; and

d. Such other and further relief, at law or in equity, to which these

Plaintiffs are justly entitled.

Respectfully submitted,

MITHOFF LAW

/s/ Richard Warren MIthoff

Richard Warren Mithoff
Texas Bar No. 14228500
rmithoff@mithofflaw.com
Sherie Potts Beckman
Texas Bar No. 16182400
sbeckman@mithofflaw.com
Joseph R. Alexander, Jr.
Texas Bar No. 00995150
jalexander@mithofflaw.com
MITHOFF LAW
500 Dallas Street, Suite 3450
Houston, Texas 77002
Telephone: (713) 654-1122
Facsimile: (713) 739-8085

Page 28 of 30
Brent Cordell
Texas Bar No. 24005953
brentcordell@smithhassler.com
Fletcher F. Cockrell
Texas Bar No. 24040707
fcockrell@smithandhassler.com
Andrew M. Bivona
Texas Bar No. 24092138
abivona@smithandhassler.com
SMITH & HASSLER
1225 North Loop West, Suite 525
Houston, Texas 77008
Telephone: (713) 739-1250
Facsimile: (713) 864-7226

Kevin H. Dubose
Texas Bar No. 06150500
kdubose@adjtlaw.com
ALEXANDER DUBOSE
JEFFERSON & TOWNSEND LLP
1844 Harvard Street
Houston, Texas 77008
Telephone: (713) 523-2358
Facsimile: (713) 523-4553

Alexandra W. Albright
Texas Bar No. 21723500
aalbright@adjtlaw.com
ALEXANDER DUBOSE
JEFFERSON & TOWNSEND LLP
515 Congress Ave., Suite 2350
Austin, Texas 78701
Telephone: (512) 482-9300
Facsimile: (512) 482-9303

ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFFS

Page 29 of 30
 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing instrument has been
forwarded to the all counsel of record via the Courts mandated electronic filing system and/or
certified mail, return receipt requested and/or hand delivery and/or by facsimile transmission
and/or by electronic transmission, on this the 26th day of July, 2016.

/s/ Richard Warren Mithoff

RICHARD WARREN MITHOFF

Page 30 of 30