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

Center for Environmental Health v. Total Sweeteners Inc., et al.

Published: Mar. 31, 2023 | Result Date: Jun. 20, 2022 | Filing Date: Jan. 5, 2021 |

Case number: RG 19-001951 Settlement –  $250,000

Judge

Brad S. Seligman

Court

Alameda County Superior Court


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Eric S. Somers
(Lexington Law Group)

Ryan B. Berghoff
(Lexington Law Group)


Defendant

R. Raymond Rothman
(Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP)


Facts

Center for Environmental Health brought actions against a series of defendants including Domino Foods, Inc., alleging that molasses sold by such companies contained lead and lead compounds and that such products exposed consumers of finished molasses products to lead, a known carcinogen and reproductive toxicant, without any health hazard warnings. Domino sold bulk molasses containing lead to companies such as B&G Foods North America, Inc. that then sold finished molasses products to consumers. Plaintiff previously settled with other defendants in the case including Imperial Sugar Company; and JFC International, Inc.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS: Plaintiff contended that defendants failed to warn individuals in California that they were being exposed to lead and lead compounds, chemicals known to the State of California to cause cancer and birth defects and other reproductive harm. Such exposures had occurred, and continued to occur, when people consumed molasses that was sold by defendants, their customers, or other downstream entities as a finished product. Consumers, including pregnant women and children, were exposed to lead when they consumed defendants' molasses. Defendants provided no warnings whatsoever about the carcinogenic or reproductive hazards associated with lead exposure resulting from consumption of molasses sold by defendants or their downstream customers as a finished product. Defendants' conduct thus violated the warning provision of Proposition 65.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS: Defendants denied all contentions.

Result

Plaintiff and defendant Domino Foods, Inc., settled the case for $250,000. Pursuant to the settlement agreement, Domino Foods is prohibited from selling or offering for sale any covered products that contains lead in a concentration exceeding the specified lead level, unless it provides a clear and reasonable warning.


#140505

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

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