Vinocur v. Cherry Man Industries, Inc.

Citizen enforcer Laurence Vinocur’s allegations against defendant Cherry Man Industries, Inc. (“Cherry Man”) were resolved on October 3, 2013, when the parties executed a Consent Judgment.  In this matter, Vinocur alleged that Cherry Man sold upholstered furniture with foam padding containing the flame retardant tris(1,3-dichloro-2-propyl) phosphate (“TDCPP”) in the State of California without providing the requisite health hazard warnings.

As part of the settlement, Cherry Man agreed not to sell any of the furniture in California after March 31, 2014, unless it contains no more than 25 parts per million each of TDCPP and tris(2-chloroethyl) phosphate (“TCEP”) when analyzed using state or federally approved testing methodologies. Additionally, Cherry Man agreed to provide its vendors with the reformulation standards by October 15, 2013, and instruct them to provide products that comply expeditiously.  Furniture currently existing in Cherry Man’s inventory may be sold with Proposition 65 warnings provided.  Should Cherry Man provide written certification that all products sold in California after November 1, 2013 qualify as reformulated, Vinocur agreed to waive a portion of the civil fine.  Additionally, Vinocur provided a credit for extending the breadth of reformulation, among other credits available, if Cherry Man should provide written certification that all furniture sold in California after March 15, 2014, contains no detectable amounts of tris(2,3-dibromopropyl)phosphate (“TDBPP”) in addition to satisfying the TCEP and TDCPP requirements.

The Consent Judgment requires settlement payments of $106,500, divided therein between civil penalties, 75% of which are paid to California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, and compensation to whistleblower Vinocur and his counsel for their successful enforcement of this matter in the public interest.