Proposition 65

News & Analysis as of

California Appellate Court Affirms Judgment in Favor of Food Company on Claims of Lead Exposure

In an important victory for defendants doing business in California, the California Court of Appeal recently affirmed a trial court’s decision holding that the defendants did not violate Proposition 65, California’s toxics...more

Proposed California Bill Seeks to (Finally) Define “Knowing and Intentional” Element of Proposition 65

On February 23, 2015, Assemblyman Bill Quirk (D-Hayward) introduced legislation that would definitively define the term “knowing and intentional” that is contained in the actual text of Proposition 65 (Prop 65). There has...more

In Big Defense Win, Appellate Court Affirms that Proposition 65 Exposure Level Can Be Based on Average Consumption Over Time

In an important victory for defendants doing business in California, the California Court of Appeal recently affirmed a trial court’s decision holding that the defendants did not violate Proposition 65 (Prop 65), California’s...more

New Prop. 65 Regulations Being Considered in California

For nearly three decades, California’s Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, better known as “Proposition 65," has, under specified conditions, required businesses that sell or distribute products in...more

Court Of Appeal Upholds “Safe Harbor” Exemption From Prop 65 Warnings For Lead In Fruit Products

In a much anticipated decision, a California Court of Appeal has upheld a trial court ruling for the defense, finding that trace levels of lead in packaged fruits, vegetables and fruit juice products require no Proposition 65...more

Food Litigation Newsletter - March 2015 # 2

In This Issue: - RECENT SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENTS AND RULINGS ..Ninth Circuit Reverses Dismissal Based on Standing, Preemption ..Court Applies Common Sense Standard in Dismissing ‘No Refined Sugars’...more

Arsenic in Wine: What You Need to Know About the Class Action Claims

What is the Doris Charles, et al. v. The Wine Group, et al., No. BC576061 (Cal. Sup. Ct., Los Angeles County) lawsuit? A lawsuit filed last week as a class action against wineries, wine distributors and wine retailers...more

Calif. Appellate Court Endorses Averaging Lead Exposure in Food and Beverage Prop. 65 Disputes

In a rare published decision concerning California’s expansive Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, commonly known as “Prop 65,” the California Court of Appeal on March 17, 2015, dealt companies a victory in...more

Product Liability 2014 Year in Review

In This Issue: - Letter From The Chair - Key Practice Trends + Highlights - Consumer Products - Pharmaceutical Products and Medical Devices - Aviation - Toxics Regulation and Toxic...more

California Appellate Court Takes on Proposition 65 Warning Triggers

Auburn Courthouse Prop 65Recent attempts to modify California’s Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, Proposition 65, have been the work of the California Legislature. (See A Sane Tweak To Proposition 65 and...more

Appellate Court Gets It Right: Realistic Product Use Data Can Be Used by Businesses to Defend Lawsuits

California’s First District Court of Appeal issued a unanimous and potentially far-reaching and precedent-setting decision on March 17, 2015, siding with businesses in our defeat of a lawsuit that sought to require cancer and...more

Proposed Changes to Proposition 65: What It Means for Texas Businesses

If you’ve been to California recently, you likely returned with a heightened awareness of the dangers present in the products you consume and use on a daily basis. That is because in California, Proposition 65 requires...more

California Appellate Court Agrees with Defendants on Prop. 65 Exposure Averaging

In one of the most significant appellate decisions interpreting California’s Prop. 65, the California Court of Appeal on March 17 ruled that, for purposes of establishing the Prop. 65 “safe harbor” defense, exposure to a...more

A Sane Tweak to Proposition 65

This space has addressed on several occasions recent attempts to modify California’s Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, commonly known as Proposition 65. Many of the comments on proposed changes to...more

Medical Monitoring For Soft Drink Purchasers: Not The Choice For This Generation

Those of us who have been paying at least marginal attention to developments in popular culture and product liability law—not necessarily the fanatical level of attention to these subjects paid by certain of our...more

Prop 65 Amendment Would Limit Frivolous Claims and “Overwarning”

Legislation was introduced in the California Assembly last week to provide much-needed relief from frivolous Proposition 65 claims and avoid “over-warning” the public where scientific evidence shows that products or premises...more

New Proposed Requirements for Prop 65 Warnings Create Potentially Significant Implications for Businesses Across the Country

The California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) recently sent out a notice regarding proposed rulemaking to repeal the existing regulations that govern the provision of clear and reasonable warnings...more

Proposed Prop 65 Rules Won't Please Calif. Businesses

California’s Proposition 65 warning requirements (Health & Safety Code Sections 25249.6 et seq.) have long been a major concern for businesses that want their products offered for sale in the state’s large marketplace....more

Proposition 65: OEHHA Proposes Revisions to Proposition 65 Warning Regulations

On January 12, 2015, the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) proposed important new regulations that would repeal and replace the existing Article 6 regulations regarding the all-important "clear and...more

California Earthquake: “Proposition 65” About to be Rocked?

California’s “Proposition 65” warning requirements (Health & Safety Code Sections 25249.6 et seq.) have long been a major concern for businesses that want their products offered for sale in the State’s large marketplace....more

Proposition 65 May Mean More Than Warning Signs and Lawsuits

As this space has discussed, Proposition 65 has been the subject of attempts by the California Legislature to reform the enforcement of the law. Recently, the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment...more

Proposition 65 Plaintiff Group Seeks to Rescind “Safe Harbor” Standard for Lead

Mateel Environmental Justice Foundation, which has a long history as a Proposition 65 plaintiff, filed a writ petition earlier this week seeking to challenge and rescind the “safe harbor” level for lead under Proposition 65. ...more

New Requirements for Proposition 65 Warnings Proposed

On January 12, 2015, California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) proposed the first significant revisions to Proposition 65’s warning requirements since the 1980s. The updated regulations seek to...more

2015 May Bring Significant (More Burdensome) Changes to Proposition 65 Warning Requirements

Following Governor Jerry Brown’s call in mid-2013 for reform of Proposition 65, the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA), the state agency that writes the regulations governing Proposition 65,...more

Will the “Naturally Occurring” Exemption for Food (and Supplements) Become an Achievable Defense in 2015?

What is the “Naturally Occurring” Defense? - One of the few defenses available to a company under Proposition 65 is the “Naturally Occurring” exemption for “food.” (CA Code of Regulations, Title 27, § 25501). Food...more

67 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 3

All the intelligence you need, in one easy email:

Great! Your first step to building an email digest of JD Supra authors and topics. Log in with LinkedIn so we can start sending your digest...

Sign up for your custom alerts now, using LinkedIn ›

* With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name.
×