News & Analysis as of

CA Supreme Court Toxic Exposure

Mintz - Consumer Product Safety Viewpoints

California Supreme Court Ends Glyphosate Debate, for the Time Being

One week after a San Francisco jury decided against Monsanto and awarded a plaintiff $289 million due to the alleged exposure that caused his cancer, the California Supreme Court refused to hear any further challenges by...more

Mintz - Consumer Product Safety Viewpoints

A Federal Court Gets Opportunity to Weigh In on Prop 65 With a Little Help from Some Friends

Much of the recent discussion regarding Prop 65 has been focused on the regulatory changes going into effect in August of 2018. And that makes sense since there will be significant changes to the warnings, responsibility, and...more

Polsinelli

Court Decides Take-Home Exposure Duty Claims with 'Wide-Ranging Impact'

Polsinelli on

Employers and premises owners have a duty to "members of a worker's household" to exercise ordinary care to prevent take-home asbestos exposures, the California Supreme Court held on December 1, 2016. This ruling expands...more

K&L Gates LLP

Better Late Than Never: The California Supreme Court Reverses Itself, Holding That Corporate Policyholders May Assign Insurance...

K&L Gates LLP on

Asset purchase and sale transactions are a preferred structure for many corporate deals. For a variety of reasons, it may be prudent for businesses or product lines to be transferred through these transactions, and an asset...more

4 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide