California Employment News: California Wage Compliance – Avoiding Legal Pitfalls
California Employment News: CA Local Minimum Wage Updates
(Podcast) California Employment News: CA Local Minimum Wage Updates
Adaptive Reuse: From Desks to Doorways
Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 514: Listen and Learn -- Discovery (Civ Pro)
A Counterintuitive Approach to Winning Without Litigation: One-on-One with Haley Morrison
(Podcast) California Employment News: Creating the Report for a Workplace Investigation – Part 4 (Featured)
California Employment News: Creating the Report for a Workplace Investigation – Part 4 (Featured)
Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 511: Listen and Learn -- Landlord/Tenant Law (Part 1)
From Permits to Penalties: A Deep Dive Into Coastal Development Law
California Employment News: Synthesizing Evidence in a Workplace Investigation – Part 3 (Featured)
Doc Fees Decoded: The Price of Paperwork in Auto Sales — Moving the Metal: The Auto Finance Podcast
(Podcast) California Employment News: Gathering Information in a Workplace Investigation – Part 2 (Featured)
California Employment News: Gathering Information in a Workplace Investigation – Part 2 (Featured)
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 314: Listen and Learn -- False Imprisonment and Shopkeeper’s Privilege (Torts)
(Podcast) California Employment News: Starting a Workplace Investigation – Part 1 (Featured)
California Employment News: Starting a Workplace Investigation – Part 1 (Featured)
Feeling the Heat: Strategies to Keep Cool Under California's Consumers Legal Remedies Act — The Consumer Finance Podcast
The JustPod: Prosecutor-Initiated Resentencing: A Discussion with Hillary Blout
Our notable ruling roundup aims to keep our readers up to date on recent rulings in the food & consumer packaged goods space. Kimberly Banks, et al. v. R.C. Bigelow, Inc., No.2:20-cv-06208-DDP-RAO (C.D. Cal. – April 8,...more
If your business manufactures, distributes or supplies consumer products sold in California, you are likely familiar with California Proposition 65, which requires warnings on products that may expose consumers to chemicals...more
Starting on Jan. 3, 2026, warning requirements for vinyl acetate can be enforced under California’s Proposition 65, which is commonly referred to as “Prop 65.” The California agency charged with implementing Prop 65, the...more
This week, I sat down with Lisa R. Burchi, Of Counsel to Bergeson & Campbell, P.C. and resident expert on Proposition 65, among many other chemical laws. Lisa explains why businesses doing business in California need to know...more
In the three months since our previous post about major California businesses being targeted with a Proposition 65 (“Prop. 65”) Notice of Violation (“NOV”) for allegedly exposing California customers to Bisphenol S (BPS) in...more
In the first half of 2025, two private enforcers have targeted over 200 companies operating in the state for purported exposure to Bisphenol S (BPS) from retail store thermal receipts provided to customers in California. The...more
A Federal District Court in California has ruled that Proposition 65 warning requirements for dietary acrylamide are unconstitutional. The California Chamber of Commerce (“CalChamber”) sued five years ago challenging the...more
The US District Court for the Eastern District of California on May 2, 2025 granted summary judgment in favor of the California Chamber of Commerce, holding that Proposition 65 warning requirements for acrylamide in food...more
On January 3, 2025, vinyl acetate was added to the Prop 65 list as a carcinogen. Vinyl acetate is a synthetic chemical, and a colorless liquid with a sweet, fruity smell. In its Evidence on the Carcinogenicity of Vinyl...more
A lot is going on in the extended producer responsibility (“EPR”) packaging world this month. Maryland and Washington became the sixth and seventh states respectively to enact EPR packaging laws. And this week, just a...more
On May 2, 2025, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California issued a landmark ruling in California Chamber of Commerce v. Bonta, Case No. 2:19-cv-02019, holding that Proposition 65 (“Prop. 65”) warning...more
In an important decision under California’s Proposition 65, a federal court recently ruled that businesses cannot be required to provide a product warning under Proposition 65 where there is no scientific consensus on whether...more
Acrylamide, a Proposition 65-listed substance that naturally forms in the cooking and heating of many plant-based foods, has been the focus of court action over the past six years. However, companies will no longer be...more
On May 2, 2025, the Eastern District of California found that Prop 65 warning requirements for dietary acrylamide violate the First Amendment, and granted a permanent injunction enjoining enforcement of those warnings....more
Until this year, food companies—often the target of Proposition 65 enforcement actions—have been limited to specific “full-length” language for Prop 65 warnings, without explicit guidance regarding whether short-form warnings...more
On May 2, a federal district court in Sacramento permanently enjoined the Prop 65 warning for acrylamide in food, finding it to be unconstitutional. At issue in the case, California Chamber of Commerce v. Bonta (E.D. Cal. No....more
The California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) recently amended its regulations concerning requirements for consumer product warnings to qualify for “safe harbor” protection from enforcement actions...more
California shoppers might be getting more than just a receipt at checkout — they may also be exposed to a toxic chemical, according to Proposition 65 (“Prop. 65”) enforcer Center for Environmental Health (CEH) represented by...more
Top Legal Challenges for the Consumer Products Industry in 2025 - With 2025 underway, the AFS Consumer Products team highlights some of the most pressing legal issues facing the consumer products industry this year....more
Signaling renewed interest in a longstanding area of tension between federal and California labeling requirements for pesticide products, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recently extended the public comment...more
On January 1, 2025, new regulations governing Proposition 65’s so-called safe-harbor warnings went into effect. Proposition 65 requires businesses that employ 10 or more persons to provide “clear and reasonable” warnings on...more
California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (“OEHHA”) has revised the regulations on “Safe Harbor” warning language effective January 1, 2025. While a business is not required to use these Safe Harbor...more
Short-form warnings for products that may expose consumers to chemicals on California’s Prop 65 list must now include at least one chemical name to qualify for Prop 65’s “safe harbor” protections—with one caveat. Businesses...more
What Food Product Companies Need to Know About the New Proposition 65 Warning Requirements - On December 6, 2024, the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA), the lead agency that implements Proposition...more
As businesses and legal professionals strive to keep pace with California’s ever-changing regulatory environment, Proposition 65 (“Prop 65”) remains a key focal point. Known for its stringent requirements on chemical exposure...more