This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Consumer Law
Consumer Protection
Violation of Proposition 65

Peter Englander v. Grand Basket Co. Inc., KMart Corporation, Hancock & Moore Inc., Jessica Charles LLC, Jofran Sales Inc., Lifestyle Furniture Home Store Corporation, Riverside Furniture Corporation, and Does 1 through 150, inclusive

Published: Dec. 14, 2013 | Result Date: Nov. 8, 2013 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: RG13677613 Settlement –  $131,000

Court

Alameda Superior


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Clifford A. Chanler
(The Chanler Group)

Troy C. Bailey
(Voorhees & Bailey LLP)


Defendant

Samir J. Abdelnour
(Hanson Bridgett LLP)

Donald P. Eichhorn
(Wilson, Elser, Moskowitz, Edelman & Dicker LLP)

Amber M. Hager

Kevin C. Mayer

Todd O. Maiden
(Reed Smith LLP)

Jeffrey B. Margulies
(Norton Rose Fulbright US LLP)


Facts

Peter Englander filed a Proposition 65 representative action against Grand Basket Co. Inc., KMart Corp., Riverside Furniture Corp. and others, based on the alleged presence of Tris(1,3-dichloro-2-propyl) phosphate, also known as TDCPP, a flame retardant chemical in foam utilized in padded furniture the defendants sold. In 2011, TDCPP was placed on the Proposition 65 list of toxic chemicals known to cause cancer.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Englander argued that the defendants failed to warn of the presence of TDCPP in their padded furniture, despite manufacturing, distributing, and selling such furniture in California. Various items of padded upholstered furniture contained TDCPP, and exposed infants, children, and others to the dangerous chemical. Englander asserted that defendants' failure to warn consumers violated Proposition 65, and sought an injunction against them.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS:
Defendants denied these allegations, and asserted that their products were in compliance with the law when placed into the stream of commerce and that they had not "knowingly and intentionally" exposed consumers to TDCPP.

Result

Jofran Sales Inc. and Riverside Furniture entered into a stipulated consent judgment. Jofran and Riverside Furniture agreed to cease selling products that contained more than 25 parts per million of TDCPP. Jofran and Riverside Furniture were also required to pay $131,000 in civil penalties and compensation to Englander.

Other Information

FILING DATE: April 30, 2013.


#111913

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390