Summary
“This case could be big numbers because it’s going back several years, so it could be lucrative in terms of damages,” Deborah A. Sivas, a professor at Stanford Law School in Palo Alto, Calif., told Bloomberg BNA.
“But the plaintiffs have a pretty high burden,” said Sivas, who directs the Stanford Environmental Law Clinic and has experience in Prop. 65 litigation.
“Manufacturers can argue that their product doesn’t pose a risk, even if the constituent is in the product, because of the way that it’s used,” she said. “Defendants can also argue that lab results are wrong or that there was no exposure.”
Manufacturers can also dispute whether the constituent is at a level that will cause harm, Sivas said.
…
But the attorney general can also try to block the case, Stanford’s Sivas said.
“Historically, if they don’t like the case, they may try to convince the plaintiffs’ lawyers not to bring it, because they want the law to be taken seriously,” Sivas said.
Read More