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...

Administrative/Regulatory

Mar. 19, 2013

Attempt to reform Prop. 65 misguided

While the goal of the legislation is laudable, it does not provide a realistic remedy to what is a very significant problem. By Tom Clarke


By Tom Clarke


The 60-day notice provision of California's Proposition 65 - which requires California businesses to notify consumers of significant amounts of certain chemicals in their products - was allegedly modeled after several then-existing (1986) federal environmental statutes. Like federal law, Prop. 65's notice provision was and is meant to provide an opportunity for state or local prosecutors to undertake the legal action in lieu of "private...

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