For reprint rights or to purchase a copy of your Daily Journal photo, email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices or call 949-702-5390.

To buy more copies, call 866-531-1492 or email subscribe@dailyjournal.com
This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.
Subscribe to the Daily Journal for access to Daily Appellate Reports, Verdicts, Judicial Profiles and more...

Civil Litigation

Oct. 8, 2019

Proposition 65 should not include acrylamide, Chamber says

The California Chamber of Commerce sued state Attorney General Xavier Becerra Monday in an attempt to remove acrylamide from substances that require a warning under Proposition 65.

The California Chamber of Commerce sued state Attorney General Xavier Becerra Monday in an attempt to remove acrylamide from substances that require a warning under Proposition 65.

Filed in the Eastern District of California, the complaint seeks declaratory and injunctive relief against Proposition 65, the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, which requires businesses selling food products containing harmful subst...

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
$795 for an entire 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?

Enewsletter Sign-up

Related Content

Civil Litigation, Government

Group seeking warning labels on coffee wants to intervene in another case

Oct. 21, 2019
By Malcolm Maclachlan

Civil Litigation, Government

Warning label requirements for chemical in coffee said to be unconstitutional

Nov. 12, 2019
By Justin Kloczko

Civil Litigation, Government

Judge denies administrative record motion in Starbucks case

Nov. 13, 2019
By Justin Kloczko

Civil Litigation, Health Care & Hospital Law, Government

State’s OK of coffee risk admitted in long-running case

Oct. 4, 2019
By Justin Kloczko

Civil Litigation, Health Care & Hospital Law, Government

New battle brewing over whether coffee requires a warning label

Sep. 18, 2019
By Justin Kloczko

Civil Litigation

Prop 65 plaintiff: State previously said coffee is hazardous

Sep. 17, 2019
By Justin Kloczko

Civil Litigation

Coffee defendants can use state regulation as defense

Aug. 26, 2019
By Justin Kloczko

Government, Constitutional Law

Coffee safety declaration violates separation of powers

Aug. 8, 2019
By Raphael Metzger

Elihu Berle

Elihu M. Berle
Los Angeles County (Los Angeles)


By using our website, you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy. You can learn more about how we use cookies by reviewing our Privacy Policy here.