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.

Business Law
Unfair Competition
Outdated Over-the-Counter Drugs

The People of the State of California v. Dollar Tree Stores Inc., Dollar Tree Distribution Inc., Family Dollar LLC

Published: Jan. 12, 2024 | Result Date: Apr. 14, 2023 | Filing Date: Apr. 5, 2023 |

Case number: STK-CV-UBT-2023-3262 Settlement –  $2,444,050

Judge

Barbara A. Kronlund

Court

San Joaquin County Superior Court


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Stephanie B. Weissman
(Office of the San Bernardino District Attorney)

Celeste L. Kaisch
(Office of the San Joaquin County District Attorney)

David J. Irey
(Office of the Yolo County District Attorney)


Defendant

Ted Wolff
(Faegre, Drinker, Biddle & Reath LLP)


Facts

Dollar Tree Stores, Inc., Dollar Tree Distribution, Inc., and Family Dollar, LLC are three corporations that owned and operated bulk discount stores or distribution centers in California that sold drug products. The People of the State of California brought a complaint by and through its attorneys, Ronald J. Freitas, District Attorney of San Joaquin County; Jason Anderson, District Attorney of San Bernardino County; and Jeff W. Reisig, District Attorney of Yolo County, against Dollar Tree Stores, Inc., Dollar Tree Distribution, Inc., and Family Dollar, LLC, seeking injunctive relief, civil penalties, and other relief for violations of the Business & Professions Code and Health and Safety Code.

Contentions

PLAINTIFFS' CONTENTIONS: Plaintiffs alleged that defendants sold and offered for sale outdate over-the-counter drugs after the expiration date stamped or embossed on the products' containers in violation of Health and Safety Code Section 110286. Further, plaintiffs contended that defendants did not maintain adequate procedures to ensure all of its locations thoroughly verified and removed over-the-counter drug products whose expiration had passed from its inventory of items available for sale to the public.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS: Defendants denied all contentions.

Result

Defendants agreed to pay $2,444,050 million in civil penalties, plus $350,000 for reimbursement of investigation and enforcement costs and $100,000 in *cy pres* restitution.


#142231

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

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