Distributors

Earlier this month, California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (“OEHHA”) issued a Notice of Emergency Action to allow temporary use of a standard point-of-sale warning message for bisphenol A (“BPA”) exposures from canned and bottled foods and beverages. This emergency rulemaking came only three weeks before California’s…

Last week, FDA finalized new food safety regulations seeking to ensure the sanitary transport of human and animal food, as required under the Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA). The final Sanitary Transportation of Human and Animal Food Rule will affect shippers, loaders, carriers, and receivers of food transported…

There have been many twists and turns over the past four years concerning the CPSC’s regulation of certain high powered, rare-earth magnet sets and its litigation against various entities selling these magnets. In the latest chapter of the magnets saga, a federal court in Colorado has permanently enjoined…

In a recent post, we detailed lawsuits filed by corn exporters, farmers, and other stakeholders against Syngenta Corp. regarding its marketing of corn which contains genetically modified (“GMO”) traits that have not been approved for export to countries such as China. On December 11, 2014, the Judicial Panel…

In April 2010, the Council for Education and Research on Toxics (CERT) sued Starbucks Corp. and other coffee sellers alleging they violated California’s Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act, passed by California voters in 1986 as Proposition 65, by failing to warn consumers about carcinogens in their…

Throughout the year, this space has periodically re-visited the topic of regulating the manufacture and labeling of foods with genetically modified ingredients (GMOs) at the state and federal level. This week, a lawsuit out of Kauai, Hawaii shed light on the fate of these regulations at the county…

Last week, the California Supreme Court granted review of Ramos v. Brenntag Specialties, Inc. to resolve a split in the Second Appellate District regarding the application of California’s component parts doctrine. The component parts doctrine stands for the proposition that a company that manufactures component parts cannot be…

In April, we wrote about the Vermont legislature’s approval of a bill that would require manufacturers to change the retail labels of certain foods to indicate that they are GMO. On May 8, 2014, Vermont enacted the final version of this bill, now Act 120, which requires manufacturers…

Last month, we wrote about the toxic chemicals legislation bouncing between the Vermont House and Senate (click here for our prior post). On May 9, 2014, the Vermont Legislature gave final approval to the bill, S.239, which gives the Vermont Department of Health the authority to require manufacturers…

Since the inception of the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), voluntary recall agreements between the agency and companies conducting a recall (commonly referred to as “corrective action plans”) have not been legally binding on the company conducting the recall. At the November 13, 2013 meeting of the…

California is one of the largest consumer markets in the United States. When it comes to environmental regulations, California can be the tail that wags the dog. It is not difficult for manufacturers, importers and retailers to inadvertently run afoul of California’s comprehensive environmental regulations. Those regulations just…

Contract clauses impacting risk assumption and risk transfer which are integral to the capturing of recall costs are often relegated to the “boiler plate” section of many Supply Agreements or are preprinted on the reverse side of POs that are often not sent by PDF or fax.