Dennis Raglin Quoted in Chemical Watch: “California Law Requires Prop 65 Settlements to Have ‘Public Benefit’”
Dennis Raglin was quoted in a Chemical Watch article titled “California Law Requires Prop 65 Settlements to Have ‘Public Benefit.’” The article discusses a new California law modifying how courts review and approve certain Proposition 65 settlements, adding new public benefit requirements and establishing a procedure for resolving disputes over plaintiffs’ attorney fees.
Raglin said that the legislation’s public interest and public benefit requirements may not have much practical effect because courts already consider these concepts when reviewing settlements.
The legislature may have wanted to make sure this language “was also included within the Prop 65 statute, but either way it restates existing law,” Raglin said. That said, he noted the measure could strengthen the state attorney general’s role in settlement reviews.
Under the law, settlements requiring defendants to reduce exposure to a listed chemical may qualify for a presumption that they provide a public benefit. Disputes over whether companies have achieved those reductions could strengthen “the AG’s ability to object to settlements and possibly force defendants to litigate, raising costs,” according to Raglin.
Disagreements could also arise over how parties demonstrate that exposure to a listed chemical has been reduced, he said, particularly in food cases where chemical concentrations may vary between production lots and different testing methods may yield different results.
Raglin also questioned how the legislation’s language that exposure reductions be measured against “the level that existed before the settlement” would be determined in practice. “How do we determine ‘the level that existed before’? What test method do we use? Can the defendant rely on averaging to get to the level of exposure?” Raglin asked. “This likely strengthens the hand of the AG’s office to impose its will and kill averaging exposure in food settlements.”
Read the article. Subscription may be required.
The information on this website is presented as a service for our clients and Internet users and is not intended to be legal advice, nor should you consider it as such. Although we welcome your inquiries, please keep in mind that merely contacting us will not establish an attorney-client relationship between us. Consequently, you should not convey any confidential information to us until a formal attorney-client relationship has been established. Please remember that electronic correspondence on the internet is not secure and that you should not include sensitive or confidential information in messages. With that in mind, we look forward to hearing from you.