News & Analysis as of

Warning Labels Proposition 65 Wine & Alcohol

Shook, Hardy & Bacon L.L.P.

Food and Beverage Litigation and Regulatory Update - July 2025

A report arguing for raising taxes on alcohol and sugar-sweetened beverages, a law requiring labels to disclose if an animal was harmed during production, a lawsuit calling grain alcohol "inherently dangerous," and more. It...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Second Prop 65 Amendment Effective April 1, 2021: New Warnings Required

McDermott Will & Emery on

The Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, also known as Proposition 65 (Prop 65), was enacted as a ballot initiative and requires businesses to inform Californians about exposures to chemicals that are known...more

Hahn Loeser & Parks LLP

California’s Proposition 65: New Requirements For Alcoholic Beverages Purchased Over the Internet Or Through Mobile Apps Effective...

California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) has recently amended Proposition 65. These amendments include substantive changes related to the methods for providing warnings for alcoholic beverages...more

Polsinelli

Are you on the Prop 65 “Bounty Hunter” Radar? Beware, Online Sale of Wine Into California Could Cost You $2500 a Pop!

Polsinelli on

In the last few weeks, Plaintiff John Devlin has initiated more than 50 Notices of Violation or “Threatened Violation” under California's Safe Drinking Harbor and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986 ("Prop 65") alleging multiple...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

New Changes to California Prop 65: What Oregon and Washington Manufacturers Must Do to Comply

As a business owner in the Pacific Northwest, you likely have heard of the changes to California’s regulations regarding warning labels on consumer products, Proposition 65, which takes effect August 30, 2018. Your business...more

McDermott Will & Emery

California Court of Appeal Holds That “Safe Harbor” Defense Precludes Suit Based on Presence of Inorganic Arsenic in Wines

Last month, the Court of Appeal of California, Second Appellate District, Division Four, issued an opinion in Charles v. Sutter Home Winery, Inc. (2018 Cal. App. LEXIS 418*; 2018 WL 2126987). The court considered the...more

Downey Brand LLP

Winemakers Prevail in Arguing That Providing Current Safe Harbor Warning for Alcoholic Beverages Is Compliant with Prop 65

Downey Brand LLP on

On May 9, 2018, the Second Appellate District held in Charles et al. v. Sutter Home Winery, Inc., et al. that several winemakers that provided general Proposition 65 safe harbor warnings for alcoholic beverages on their...more

Stoel Rives - Environmental Law Blog

A Prop. 65 Win for Winemakers: No Separate Warning Required for Inorganic Arsenic

The California Court of Appeal recently handed a victory to winemakers, ruling that a specific Proposition 65 (“Prop. 65”) warning is not required regarding the presence of inorganic arsenic. The lawsuit, Charles et al. v....more

Downey Brand LLP

Proposition 65 Warning Required for Furfuryl Alcohol as of September 30, 2017

Downey Brand LLP on

On and after September 30, 2017, a Proposition 65 warning is required for products containing furfuryl alcohol (CAS No. 98-00-0). California’s Proposition 65, also known as the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of...more

King & Spalding

International Food Law Gazette - July 2015

King & Spalding on

King & Spalding is pleased to provide this first edition of the International Food Law Gazette, a publication of our Food & Beverage Group. For decades, King & Spalding has closely advised leading food, beverage and dietary...more

10 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide