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

Erika McCartney v. Savory Spice Shop Inc., and Does 1 through 500, inclusive

Published: Feb. 28, 2020 | Result Date: Mar. 14, 2019 | Filing Date: Nov. 15, 2017 |

Case number: CGC-17-562527 Settlement –  $42,500

Judge

Ethan P. Schulman

Court

San Francisco County Superior Court


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Melvin B. Pearlston
(Pacific Justice Center)

Elizabeth D. Sonnichsen
(Pacific Justice Center)

Robert B. Hancock
(Pacific Justice Center)


Defendant

Robert M. Gilhuly
(Barg, Coffin, Lewis & Trapp, LLP)

Julia Graeser Mata
(Barg, Coffin, Lewis & Trapp, LLP)


Facts

Erika McCartney filed a lawsuit against Savory Spice Shop Inc. in relation to alleged violations of Proposition 65.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS: Plaintiff contended defendant's product contained cadmium, a chemical known to the State of California to cause birth defects and other reproductive harm, without adequately warning individuals that they were being exposed to the chemicals in violation of Proposition 65.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS: Defendant denied the contentions.

Result

The parties agreed to settle for $42,500. Moreover, under the agreement, defendant was enjoined from distributing into California products containing cadmium at certain concentration levels unless the product is accompanied with a clear and adequate Proposition 65 warning.


#133974

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

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