Nevada Supreme Court Revives Cancer Claims of 100-Plus Workers Sickened on Contaminated Rail Yard Site

The Clark County Government Center opened in 1995 on land that had operated as a Union Pacific Railroad yard since the early 1900s. Before the county built its headquarters there, workers disposed of jet fuel, cleaning solvents, and transformer fluid on the property. Environmental remediation occurred prior to the sale, but polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) remained in the soil beneath the finished building.

Within years of the building opening, county employees noticed black soot accumulating in air registers and on workstations. When workers raised concerns, county officials repeatedly told them the property was safe. Many employees, particularly those who worked in basement areas, went on to receive diagnoses of cancer and other grave illnesses. By the time a formal lawsuit took shape, at least seven workers had died.

More than 100 plaintiffs, including the estates of deceased employees, filed personal injury and wrongful death claims against Union Pacific, PCB manufacturers including Monsanto and its successors, pipeline entities, and the City of Las Vegas Downtown Redevelopment Agency. The complaint alleged that defendants failed to warn workers of known contamination hazards.

The Eighth Judicial District Court in Clark County dismissed the case on statute-of-limitations grounds, ruling that Nevada's two-year deadline under NRS 11.190(4)(e) had expired and that the discovery rule could not extend it because the statute did not explicitly reference tolling.

Eglet Adams appellate attorneys Joel Henriod and Erica Entsminger challenged that ruling before the Nevada Supreme Court. On August 15, 2024, the court reversed the dismissal. It held that Nevada's discovery rule tolls the limitations period 'until the injured party discovers or reasonably should have discovered the facts' supporting their claims, regardless of whether the underlying statute references tolling explicitly. The court also found that equitable tolling may apply where plaintiffs were unaware of the toxic contamination, received diagnoses of cancer years after leaving the building, or could not yet connect their illnesses to the site. The court further ruled that plaintiffs need not plead discovery-rule facts with particularity at the pleading stage.

With the dismissal reversed, the case returned to Clark County District Court for discovery and further litigation, with the plaintiffs' claims restored for a decision on the merits.