President Obama Signs Major Overhaul of TSCA Changing the Way The EPA...
President Obama just signed a bill amending the Toxic Substances Control Act (“TSCA”), changing the way the EPA regulates chemicals. For the last 25 years, the EPA has regarded TSCA’s principal control...
View ArticleLos Angeles Superior Court Issues Important Defense Verdict In Unique...
In a recent trial in Los Angeles Superior Court in the matter AFS Enterprises, LLC, v. Reckitt Benckiser, PLC, Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. BC539678, the plaintiff brought a single claim under...
View ArticleEnvironmental Litigation and Toxic Torts Update – Mountain West Coast Case...
COLORADO CITY FRACKING BANS PREEMPTED BY STATE LAW - City of Longmont v. Colo. Oil and Gas Ass’n, 369 P.3d 573 (Colo. 2016), 2016 Colo. LEXIS 442; City of Fort Collins v. Colo. Oil and Gas Ass’n, 369...
View ArticleEnvironmental Litigation and Toxic Torts Update – Mountain/West Coast Case...
Ninth Circuit Issues Major Cercla Decision Finding That Arranger Liability Cannot Be Based On Contamination Deposited On A Site By The Wind - Pakootas v. Teck Cominco Metals, No. 15-35228, 2016 U.S....
View ArticleEnvironmental Litigation and Toxic Torts Update – Mountain/West Coast Case...
Ninth Circuit Finds “Threatened” Designation For Bearded Seals Proper Based On New Long-Term Projections - Alaska Oil and Gas Ass’n et al. v. Pritzker et al., 840 F.3d 671, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 19084...
View ArticleCalifornia Court Of Appeal Rejects Citizens Group Nuisance Case Regarding Sea...
Citizens for Odor Nuisance Abatement v. City of San Diego, 8 Cal. App. 5th 350 (Cal. Ct. App. 2017). The Fourth Appellate District of the California Court of Appeal concluded that the City of San Diego...
View ArticleTenth Circuit Finds CERCLA Contribution Claim Not Barred by Bankruptcy...
Asarco LLC v. Noranda Mining, Inc., 844 F.3d 1201 (10th Cir. 2017). In a Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) contribution action, the Tenth Circuit ruled that...
View ArticleProp 65 Victory For Defendants – Defendants Are Entitled To Have Their Cases...
Prop 65 Plaintiffs routinely file most Prop 65 cases in Alameda County, presumably because they believe it is a plaintiff-friendly forum. However, the California Court of Appeal recently issued a...
View ArticleWARNING: Prop 65 Has Changed – If Your Product Is Sold In California Or You...
What is Prop 65? - Prop 65 is a California law that requires California consumers receive warnings regarding the presence of chemicals that cause cancer or reproductive toxicity. The law is highly...
View ArticleNinth Circuit Weighs In On Circuit Split Regarding CERCLA Contribution Claims...
Asarco, LLC v. Atlantic Richfield Company, 866 F.3d 1108 (9th Cir. 2017). In a Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) contribution case, the Ninth Circuit...
View ArticleTenth Circuit Takes Expansive View of the Definition of the Term “Mining,”...
United States of America v. Osage Wind, LLC et al., 871 F.3d 1078 2017 WL 4109940 (10th Cir. Sept. 18, 2017). Causing heartburn for project applicants developing on tribal land, the Tenth Circuit...
View ArticleTenth Circuit Holds Bureau of Land Management Improperly Relied On...
WildEarth Guardians v. United States Bureau of Land Management, et al., 870 F.3d 1222 (10th Cir. 2017). WildEarth Guardians and the Sierra Club (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) brought a claim under the...
View ArticleUnder the Radar Changes to Proposition 65 – OEHHA Issues New “Guidance” For...
If your products are sold online or you operate a website with sales to consumers in California, these changes will impact whether you can obtain “safe harbor” protection under Prop 65. Over a year...
View ArticleNinth Circuit Holds National Park Service Has the Authority to Regulate...
Sturgeon v. Frost, et al., 872 F.3d 927 (9th Cir. 2017). In September 2011, moose hunter John Sturgeon brought an action against the National Park Service (“Park Service”), alleging it inappropriately...
View ArticleNinth Circuit Finds District Court Sharply Deviated from Existing Authority...
TDY Holdings v. United States, et al., 872 F.3d 1004 (9th Cir. 2017) - TDY brought suit for contribution under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) against...
View ArticleNinth Circuit Determines That George Costanza Was Right!—In Limited...
Makah Indian Tribe, et al. v. Quileute Indian Tribe et al., 813 F.3d 1157 (9th Cir. 2017). - Defying the universal notion that whales and seals are, in fact, mammals, the Ninth Circuit recently...
View ArticleProposition 65: California Clarifies Responsibilities To Warn Amongst...
The California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) recently adopted amendments to California Code of Regulations, section 25600.2 – the section titled “Responsibility to Provide...
View ArticleThe Impact of Coronavirus on Supply Chain
The global Coronavirus Disease 2019 (“COVID-19” or “coronavirus”) outbreak has caused supply chain disruptions to businesses around the world. From delayed production to halted factory operations and...
View ArticleProp 65 Warnings and Acrylamide in Food – Can I Still Have My Coffee and...
Many of us think of coffee as a morning essential, however, there has been a long running debate between California regulators, courts, business, and consumer advocates regarding whether coffee must...
View ArticleFrustration of Purpose – Do I Have a Defense?
The COVID-19 (“coronavirus”) public health crisis has caused unprecedented business disruptions and uncertainty for existing contractual obligations. While many are focused on whether a force majeure...
View Article[Audio] Nota Bene Episode 76: The Impact of COVID-19 on Force Majeure Clauses...
The world’s commerce has come to a screeching halt in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. As a result, many businesses are finding it difficult or maybe even impossible to perform their obligations...
View ArticleNew Proposed Regulation Provides More Guidance And Some Relief On Prop 65...
The Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (“OEHHA”) recently proposed a regulation that would provide more certainty to businesses regarding the Proposition 65 (“Prop 65”) warning...
View ArticleUp In Smoke – CA Court of Appeal Dismisses Prop 65 Case Against Water Pipe...
California Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986 (Health & Safety Code § 25249.5 et seq.) (“Prop 65”) is a California law that prohibits any person in the course of doing business...
View ArticleCalifornia’s Newly Adopted “Safe Harbor” Warning Label for Acrylamide In...
California has approved a new, alternative “Safe Harbor” warning label for foods containing acrylamide, a naturally-occurring byproduct that occurs during high-heat cooking. Whether the new regulation...
View ArticleWARNING: Get Your Prop 65 House in Order for the New Year
Companies should regularly assess their Prop 65 compliance. Products, packaging, business relationships, and the rules for compliance are constantly changing. Start 2023 off right with a review of your...
View ArticleThe Intersection of Prop 65 and Free Speech: A Recent Win for Businesses
Under California’s Proposition 65 (“Prop 65”), businesses are required to give “clear and reasonable warnings” to consumers regarding potential chemical exposure if their product contains a chemical...
View ArticleProposition 65: 2023 in Review
2023 was a busy year for Prop 65 with the highest number of Notices of Violation since its inception. The California law requires consumers receive warnings regarding the presence of chemicals that...
View ArticlePFAS in Food Packaging: The Beginning of the End?
Has the final bell rung for PFAS in food packaging? On February 28, 2024, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced that all grease-proofing agents containing per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances...
View Article
