An asset management company has reportedly filed a lawsuit in a California state court against “Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty” (SHAC), an organization apparently dedicated to closing down a life sciences company that tests pharmaceutical, agricultural and veterinary products on animals, alleging that SHAC has targeted its employees for harassment because the company holds shares in a pharmaceutical company that does business with Huntingdon Life Sciences (HLS). According to BlackRock’s complaint for injunctive relief, which also named three individuals as defendants, SHAC has held demonstrations at the homes of the money manager’s employees, threatened them and terrified their children. SHAC’s website purportedly displays images of the protests and “names the targeted employees for all the public to see.” The complaint also apparently contends that one of the defendants “has already been permanently enjoined by a California state court from among other things, any act of violence or making any threat of…
Category Archives State Courts
Contending that the genetically modified (GM) corn in General Mills’ Kix Crispy Corn Puffs® and Honey Kix Crispy Corn Puffs® cereals renders their “All Natural Corn” representations false and misleading, a California resident has filed a putative class action against the company in state court. Lewis v. General Mills, Inc., No. BC472451 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., filed October 28, 2011). Citing the Cornucopia Institute’s “Cereal Crimes” report, and testing purportedly showing that Kix contains GM corn, the plaintiff seeks to certify a nationwide class of consumers who allegedly relied on the “All Natural” representations, as well as other company indicia of wholesomeness, to purchase products at a premium price and were denied the benefit of their bargain. According to the plaintiff, companies that produce GM crops note that that their genetic makeup has been “altered to exhibit traits that are not naturally theirs,” and the World Health Organization…
An environmental and public-health advocacy organization has filed a Proposition 65 lawsuit against numerous food and beverage producers in a California state court, alleging failure to warn the public that their baby and toddler foods and fruit juices contain lead, a chemical known to the state to cause reproductive toxicity or cancer. Envtl. Law Found. v. Beech-Nut Nutrition Corp., No. 11597384 (Cal. Super. Ct., Alameda Cty., filed September 28, 2011). Alleging one count of violating Proposition 65, the plaintiff seeks injunctive relief and civil penalties of $2,500 per day for each violation of the law, as well as attorney’s fees and costs. According to the complaint, the plaintiff notified the companies about the alleged violation in 2010 and provided the required notice to the state attorney general, who is not apparently prosecuting an action involving this claim.
Arch Specialty Insurance Co. has filed a declaratory judgment action in a New York state court against a company identified as a distributor of food product ingredients, including the butter-flavoring chemical diacetyl. Arch Specialty Ins. Co. v. Citrus & Allied Essences, Ltd., No. 652670/2011 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., N.Y. County, filed September 29, 2011). The insurance company contends that it has no obligation to defend or indemnify the defendant in the personal injury actions “asserted by numerous claimants against Citrus & Allied in several jurisdictions around the country.” Among other matters, the insurer claims that the events giving rise to the underlying claims did not occur during the policy period; the claims involve “damages or injuries which were expected, intended or non-fortuitous from the standpoint of Citrus & Allied”; the claims fall within a pollution exclusion clause or arise from a recall as defined by the policy; and the insured failed…
A California resident has filed a putative class action against Brinker International, Inc., alleging that when she worked for one of its Chili’s Grill & Bar Restaurants she was not paid minimum wage, because the company “fraudulently and maliciously caused Plaintiff and Class members to make up the restaurants’ cash shortages.” Eldred v. Brinker Int’l, Inc., No. 56-2011-00403808 (Cal. Super. Ct., Ventura Cty., filed September 15, 2011). According to the complaint, if a customer leaves the restaurant without paying or does not leave enough money to pay the entire tab, “it is defendant’s corporate policy to either inform the server that he or she has to pay for the walkout or that server will be written up and if it happens again that server may be terminated. Defendant uses the threat of termination to induce class members to pay for walkouts out of their own money.” Alleging failure to pay minimum…
Hundreds of individually named Philippine banana plantation workers alleging physical and mental injury from exposure to pesticides have filed suit against a number of agricultural and chemical companies in a California state court seeking compensatory and punitive damages. Macasa v. Dole Food Co., No. BC467134 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., filed August 8, 2011). The plaintiffs allege that 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane (DBCP), sold under the brand names Nemagon® and Fumazone®, is a “highly toxic and poisonous pesticide” that purportedly causes “sterility, testicular atrophy, miscarriages, congenital reproductive outcome, liver damage, asthma and various forms of cancer in humans when absorbed by the skin or inhaled.” They claim that DBCP continued to be used in the Philippines despite being banned in the United States by the Environmental Protection Agency in 1979. The complaint alleges that the U.S. Department of Agriculture advised the chemical company defendants as early as 1961 “to place precautionary warning…
A California resident has filed a pair of putative class actions in state court against companies that market their coconut water with purportedly exaggerated nutrient claims and overstated hydrating benefits or as a miracle cure for a host of medical problems. Shenkman v. All Mkt., Inc., No. BC 467166; Shenkman v. One World Enters. LLC, No. BC467165 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., filed August 8, 2011). Seeking to certify statewide consumer classes, the plaintiff alleges intentional and negligent misrepresentation, fraud, and violations of California’s False Advertising Act and Unfair Business Practices Act. The plaintiff requests compensatory and punitive damages, disgorgement, restitution, payment to a cy pres fund, a corrective advertising campaign, and an apology. Among other matters, the plaintiff claims that One World Enterprises sells “O.N.E. Coconut Water” throughout the United States in more than 18,000 retail outlets and promotes it “as a miracle product, curing various medical problems and…
A California consumer who alleged that he gained weight while using a diet drink has reportedly failed to demonstrate that he has standing to pursue putative class consumer-fraud claims against the manufacturer because he did not keep track of his caloric intake when he used the product. Fletcher v. Celsius Holdings, Inc., No. BC439055 (Cal. Super. Ct., decided August 10, 2011). Granting the manufacturer’s motion for summary judgment, the court apparently determined that, without the caloric intake data, it would be impossible for the plaintiff to prove that the product did not, as advertised, burn up to 100 calories when consumed. According to a news source, the plaintiff alleged that he used the product while training to become a firefighter from October 2009 to January 2010, and gained 10 pounds. He also alleged that he maintained a healthy diet and a rigorous exercise regimen during this period. The court suggested that…
An intermediate appellate court in Washington has affirmed the dismissal of a lawsuit challenging part of a state law requiring the humane slaughter of livestock. Pasado’s Safe Haven v. Washington, No. 64452-1-I (Wash. Ct. App., decided July 25, 2011). The plaintiff, an animal rights advocacy organization, challenged that part of the statute which included within the “humane method” definition “a method in accordance with the ritual requirements of any religious faith whereby the animal suffers loss of consciousness by anemia of the brain…” Also challenged was a provision stating that “Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to prohibit, abridge, or in any way hinder the religious freedom of any person or group.” The court ruled that the plaintiff had not presented a justiciable claim because the court could not strike just part of the statute without bringing “about a result that our legislature ‘never contemplated nor intended to accomplish.’”…
A Minnesota appellate court has ruled, as a matter of first impression, that “a trespass action can arise from a chemical pesticide being deposited in discernable and consequential amounts onto one agricultural property as the result of errant overspray during application directed at another.” Johnson v. Paynesville Farmers Union Coop. Oil Co., Nos. A10-1596 and -2135 (Minn. Ct. App., decided July 25, 2011). The plaintiffs were organic farmers who alleged that the defendant, a commercial pesticide applicator, repeatedly sprayed adjacent farms on windy days, in violation of the law, resulting in contamination of their crops from drifting chemicals. Despite the plaintiffs’ specific requests that the defendant avoid overspraying pesticide onto their fields when treating adjacent fields, the defendant contaminated their crops in 1998, 2002, 2005, 2007, and 2008, causing them to sell their products at lower prices or destroy some crops, and forcing them to take acreage out of production…
