environment chemicalsOn December 6 2017, the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) issued a notice indicating the approval of amendments to Proposition 65’s “clear and reasonable warnings” regulations. OEHHA issued these amendments to clarify and correct certain sections of the significant new regulations going into effect August 30, 2018 that will change how parties

Toxic Tort Monitor

January 17, 2018
New Developments
A Review of 2017 Personal Jurisdiction Decisions
By Taylor Concannon

In 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court in cases such as BNSF Railway Co. v. Tyrrell and Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California continued the trend that began in Goodyear and Daimler and reaffirmed its limits on personal jurisdiction

environment chemicalsOn August 30, 2016, after two years of rulemaking, California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA), the agency that administers California’s Proposition 65, adopted amendments to the Proposition 65 regulations that govern the “safe harbor” language deemed to be “clear and reasonable” and thus Proposition 65-compliant. The new standards provide consumers with more detailed information regarding potential chemical exposures.  The new standards go into effect August 30, 2018.  Until the effective date, warnings may use either the current warning language under existing 2008 regulations or the new warning language.  Products manufactured prior to the effective date will not be subject to the new requirements, and warnings set forth in court-ordered settlements or consent judgments prior to the effective date will continue to be deemed “clear and reasonable” for the exposures covered by those judgments.

Continue Reading Changes to California’s Proposition 65 Warning Requirements

Gun controlThree of the four states to consider tightening their gun-control laws pass new initiatives on Tuesday. Gun-control was on the ballot in Washington, Maine, Nevada, and California.

In California, which already has some of the nation’s most stringent gun laws, voters approved a measure that will outlaw possession of large-capacity ammunition magazines, require permits to buy ammunition, and extend California’s program that allows authorities to seize firearms from owners who bought guns legally but are no longer allowed to own them. The gun-control measure, pushed by Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom, was approved by 62 percent of voters as of Wednesday morning. The full text of the measure can be found here.
Continue Reading Gun-Control Ballot Initiatives

Toxic Tort Monitor

September 2, 2016
New Developments
Toward a Defense of Mesothelioma Cases on Causation: Low Doses and Genetics
By Mark Zellmer

Today’s defendants in asbestos litigation often face plaintiffs’ claims that they have contracted mesothelioma from exposure to low or even doubtful doses of asbestos. If the mesothelioma looks to be spontaneous (idiopathic) or the result

Toxic Tort Monitor

July 1, 2016
New Developments
Fifth District Ordered to Hear Ford Motor Company’s Appeal on Personal Jurisdiction Motion
By Jenna Marie Stupar and Nicho Kelly

In November, the Madison County Circuit Court denied a motion by Ford Motor Company to dismiss an asbestos case for lack of personal jurisdiction. The court found that Ford’s “substantial”

Toxic Tort Monitor

May 2, 2016
New Developments
Northern District of Illinois Decision on Take-Home Exposure Liability has Limited Application
By Lindsay McClure-Hartman

The Northern District of Illinois in Neumann v. Borg-Warner Morse Tec LLC, No. 15-C-10507, 2016 WL 930662 (N.D. Ill. March 10, 2016), recently granted a motion to dismiss on the basis that a product

While employers subject to the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) must provide unpaid sick leave to employees meeting certain requirements, no federal law requires employers to provide their employees with paid sick leave.  However, employers — including those already providing their employees with paid time off (PTO) — should be aware of the recent spate of state laws and local ordinances permitting employees to earn paid sick leave time.
Continue Reading Manufacturers Not Exempt from Newest Paid Sick Leave Laws

A recent case out of the Northern District of California, Lanovz v. Twinings North America, Inc., highlights the evolving landscape that litigants are facing in class certification under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 23, including courts subjecting plaintiffs’ damages models to a more rigorous analysis.
Continue Reading Twinings: Steeping Class Action Plaintiffs’ Damages Models in Comcast’s Wake

California courts have forged a shield for product manufacturers faced with liability stemming from the foreseeable but unintended use of their product in conjunction with another manufacturer’s product. Consistent with a recent decision by the California Supreme Court, a California appellate court concluded that a manufacturer is generally not liable in strict liability or negligence for harm caused by another manufacturer’s product, despite the fact that the two products are compatible to be used together.
Continue Reading California Appellate Court Affirms Limits on Liability for Compatible Products