Civil Litigation
Sep. 12, 2017
Starbucks acrylamide case returns to trial after 7 years
Coffee vendors put on their defense in Proposition 65 suit
Kennedy
LOS ANGELES — A question lingering for seven years is back at trial: Should Starbucks and other coffee vendors warn that their products contain the carcinogenic chemical known as acrylamide?
Plaintiff nonprofit Council for the Education and Research on Toxics sued Starbucks Corp., with coffee vendors, roasters and retailers claiming the chemical violates California’s Proposition 65 law that requires businesses to provide a warning on products that could contain hazardous chemicals...
To continue reading, please subscribe.
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$895, but save $100 when you subscribe today… Just $795 for the first year!
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$895, but save $100 when you subscribe today… Just $795 for the first year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In