A recent study based on toenail clippings has reportedly turned up “no evidence” of any link between dietary mercury exposure and coronary heart disease, stroke, or total cardiovascular disease. Dariush Mozaffarian, et al., “Mercury Exposure and Risk of Cardiovascular Disease in Two U.S. Cohorts,” New England Journal of Medicine, March 24, 2011. Researchers evidently used toenail clippings from approximately 7,000 people to gauge long-term mercury and selenium exposure from fish consumption, as well as collected dietary and health data from a second cohort of 173,000 participants. The results reportedly found no difference in heart disease and stroke rates for those in the top quintile for mercury concentrations and those in the bottom. Previous research had raised questions about whether the mercury content of shark, swordfish and other predatory species outweighed the cardiovascular benefits associated with high fish consumption. “Basically, what we found was very simple and very clear,” one study author…
Kellogg Co. has filed a lawsuit in a Michigan federal court against the Canadian packaging company that supplied allegedly defective liners with “offensive characteristics” (taste and odor) that purportedly caused nausea and diarrhea in some Kellogg cereal consumers and forced a “costly nationwide recall” of four company products. Kellogg Co. v. FPC Flexible Packaging Corp., No. 11-272 (W.D. Mich., S. Div., filed March 18, 2011). The cereal maker alleges violations of Michigan’s Uniform Commercial Code, breach of contract and express and implied indemnification. Alleging damages in excess of $75,000, Kellogg also seeks a declaratory judgment that it is not liable for payment of $3.3 million in materials still in the packaging company’s possession or for the $1.04 million in defective liners provided to Kellogg. According to the complaint, the packaging company has demanded payment for the liners and the materials used in their production.
Nearly 700 heirs and estates of Colombian citizens allegedly killed by “a right-wing terrorist organization” that purportedly received financial and other support from Chiquita Brands International and its subsidiaries and affiliates have sued the companies seeking monetary, injunctive and declaratory relief. Does 1 through 677 v. Chiquita Brands Int’l, Inc., No. 11-00582 (D.D.C., filed March 17, 2011). The lawsuit involves claims and litigants not included in similar litigation filed in 2010. The plaintiffs, who claim to be the “family members of trade unionists, banana workers, political organizers, social activists, and others targeted and killed by terrorists,” allege that the defendants “funded, armed, and otherwise supported” a paramilitary organization “to produce bananas in an environment free from labor opposition and social disturbances.” According to the plaintiffs, the companies’ actions violated Colombian, U.S. and international law “prohibiting crimes against humanity, extrajudicial killing, torture, war crimes, and other abuses.”
An advocate general to the European Court of Justice has reportedly issued an opinion stating that French authorities violated European Union (EU) law by suspending the cultivation of genetically modified (GM) maize on French soil without first asking the European Commission to adopt emergency measures. While such opinions do not bind the court, sources indicate that they are generally adopted. The opinion is apparently expected to affect policies in other member nations, such as Austria and Greece, that turned to the court for guidance after GM crop companies filed suit challenging national restrictions. According to Advocate General Paolo Mengozzi, the EU authorized cultivation of the GM seed at issue for animal feed in 1998, and when Monsanto sought reauthorization of the 10-year license in 2007, France outlawed the seed’s cultivation. The country invoked an EU law safeguard provision, adopted in 2004, that provides where “new or additional information” emerging after original…
According to news sources, a New Jersey tire salesman has filed a personal injury lawsuit in a state court against the company that makes Four Loko®, an alcoholic beverage that until late 2010 also contained caffeine; he alleges that after drinking two and one-half cans, he was taken to a hospital with heart arrhythmia. Mustica v. Phusion Projects, No. __ (N.J. Super. Ct., Atlantic Cty., filed March 16, 2011). Each can purportedly contained the equivalent of three cans of beer and the same amount of caffeine as two cups of coffee. While the maker of the energy drink apparently continues to maintain that mixing alcohol and caffeine is safe, it agreed to remove caffeine from the product in November 2010. The plaintiff claims that he consumed the beverage on a visit to Atlantic City in October, fell asleep and, on waking, had a racing heart and trouble breathing. Alleging permanent…
The company that makes Johnny Love Vodka® has filed a trademark infringement suit against the companies making “Pucker Vodka,” alleging that the lip imprint on the Pucker labels is likely to confuse consumers because of its similarity to the registered lip imprint on the plaintiff’s flavored-vodka bottles. JL Beverage Co., LLC v. Fortune Brands, Inc., No. 11-00417 (D. Nev., filed March 18, 2011). According to the complaint, JL Beverage Co. has used the Johnny Love Vodka mark, which incorporates a parted lip imprint as the “o” in the word “Love,” since 2004 and registered it in 2005. The lipstick color apparently varies depending on the vodka’s flavor. Alleging that the defendants recently began promoting and selling a line of flavored vodkas with a label incorporating a “nearly identical” parted lip imprint in varying colors, the plaintiff seeks injunctive relief, an order to recall and destroy all infringing products, an accounting, compensatory…
A federal court in Massachusetts has certified a class of Starbucks’ employees alleging that the company’s policy of requiring tip-sharing by baristas and their supervisors violates state law; the court also granted the plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment on that issue. Matamoros v. Starbucks Corp., No. 08-10772 (D. Mass., decided March 18, 2011). So ruling, the court rejected the defendant’s argument that “intractable intra-class conflict” precludes certification. According to the court, “an interest by certain putative class members in maintaining the allegedly unlawful policy is not a reason to deny class certification. Indeed, were the Court to hold otherwise, an employer could readily insulate itself from class liability simply by establishing a communal ‘tip pool’ for both managerial and non-managerial employees. Such an ‘end run’ clearly contravenes the purpose of the Tips law.”
A federal court in Virginia has issued an order dismissing without prejudice claims filed against two insurers by a company that makes baby formula; the parties stipulated to the dismissal after similar litigation concluded with a defense verdict following trial in state court. PBM Nutritionals, LLC v. Arch Ins. Co., No. 09-194 (E.D. Va., order entered March 23, 2011). The matter reportedly involves the failure of a hot-water supply system that leached melamine and other filtration materials into eight days’ worth of formula production, contaminating $6 million in baby formula. The manufacturer has apparently recovered $2 million under a contamination policy issued by one of its insurers, but lost its bid to recover under other policies that contained “perils excluded” clauses and pollution/contamination endorsements. The perils-excluded clauses deny coverage for damages resulting from a pollutant discharge unless the discharge is caused by a “peril” insured against. The insurers relied on contamination endorsements that…
The Center for Food Safety, Earthjustice and a number of other public interest groups have sued the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), challenging its decision to deregulate genetically engineered (GE) alfalfa. Ctr. for Food Safety v. Vilsack, No. 11-1310 (N.D. Cal., filed March 18, 2011). Other plaintiffs include the Cornucopia Institute, Geertson Seed Farms, which successfully challenged a previous agency decision to deregulate GE alfalfa, the Sierra Club, and organizations representing the interests of organic and family farmers. The complaint alleges that the environmental impact statement (EIS) that USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) prepared to support its deregulation decision violates the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), Plant Protection Act (PPA) and Administrative Procedure Act. The plaintiffs note that the court-ordered EIS “is the first (and only) EIS APHIS has ever completed for any GE crop, in over fifteen years of approving GE crops for commercial use.” Seeking…
Leaders of Edgewater Elementary School in Edgewater, Florida, are reportedly planning to meet with parents disgruntled over the school’s accommodation of a 6-year-old girl with severe peanut allergies. Noting that the girl’s allergies are life-threatening and considered a disability under the Americans with Disabilities Act, Volusia County School District spokesperson Nancy Wait said the meeting will help dispel inaccurate rumors that other students’ mouths were being wiped with disinfectant to protect the first-grader’s health. Wait said the girl’s fellow classmates are required to wash their hands before entering the classroom in the morning and after lunch, and rinse their mouths. A peanut-sniffing dog has also apparently visited the school. In answer to some parents’ suggestion that the girl be removed from the classroom and homeschooled, Wait said that was not an option because it violated the federal law. See MSNBC.com, March 22, 2011.
