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

Anthony E. Held v. Prime Enterprises Inc.

Published: Jul. 7, 2017 | Result Date: Mar. 22, 2017 |

Case number: RG17846980 Settlement –  $47,000

Court

Alameda Superior


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Troy C. Bailey
(Voorhees & Bailey LLP)

David J. Voorhees
(Voorhees & Bailey LLP)


Defendant

Carol R. Brophy
(Steptoe LLP)


Facts

Anthony Held sued defendant Prime Enterprises Inc. and others under Proposition 65.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS: Plaintiff argued that Prime manufactured and/or distributed for sale sunscreens containing benzophenone, a chemical known to cause cancer, without providing the required Prop. 65 warning on those products.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS: The defense denied plaintiff's claims and contended that its products were in compliance with all laws.

Result

Prime agreed to pay $17,000 in civil penalties and agreed to reformulate its products. Additionally, defendant will reimburse plaintiff $30,000 for his attorney fees and costs.


#126256

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

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