Prop 65 California

Held v. Forum Novelties, Inc.

Submitted by chirst on April 25, 2013
Date: 
October 2, 2012
Industry Categories: 
Apparel & Fashion Accessories
Furniture, Home Decorative, and Household Products
Featured: 
No

The Chanler Group’s groundbreaking case against fifteen manufacturers, distributors, and sellers of Halloween products for children and adults was resolved on October 2, 2012, when the Alameda County Superior Court entered a Consent Judgment in Held v. Forum Novelties, Inc. et al.  The Halloween Group enforcement action resolved citizen enforcer Anthony E. Held, Ph.D., P.E.’s allegations that the defendant Forum Novelties, Inc. and its downstream releasees Charade Costumes, Halloween Resource Center, and RubieToy Company, Inc.

Case PDF: 
application/pdf iconheldv.halloweengroup100212.pdf
Plaintiff: 
Held
Defendant: 
Forum Novelties, Inc.
Type: 
Consent Judgment
Relief: 
Reformulation, Vendor Notification
Monetary: 
$30,000-$39,999
Monetary Relief: 
Civil Penalties
Used By: 
Adults/Children
Cross-Post On: 
None

Held v. Everstar Merchandise Co., Ltd. and Tomson Merchandise Co., Ltd.

Submitted by chirst on April 25, 2013
Date: 
October 2, 2012
Industry Categories: 
Furniture, Home Decorative, and Household Products
Featured: 
No

The Chanler Group’s groundbreaking case against fifteen manufacturers, distributors, and sellers of Halloween products for children and adults was resolved on October 2, 2012, when the Alameda County Superior Court entered a Consent Judgment in Held v. Forum Novelties, Inc. et al.  The Halloween Group enforcement action resolved citizen enforcer Anthony E. Held, Ph.D., P.E.’s allegations that the defendant Everstar Merchandise Co., Ltd. and Tomson Merchandise Co., Ltd. and its downstream releasees Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.

Case PDF: 
application/pdf iconheldv.halloweengroup100212.pdf
Plaintiff: 
Held
Defendant: 
Everstar Merchandise Co., Ltd. and Tomson Merchandise Co., Ltd.
Type: 
Consent Judgment
Relief: 
Reformulation, Vendor Notification
Monetary: 
$50,000-$59,999
Monetary Relief: 
Civil Penalties
Used By: 
Adults/Children
Cross-Post On: 
None

Held v. Easter Unlimited, Inc.

Submitted by chirst on April 25, 2013
Date: 
October 2, 2002
Industry Categories: 
Apparel & Fashion Accessories
Furniture, Home Decorative, and Household Products
Featured: 
No

The Chanler Group’s groundbreaking case against fifteen manufacturers, distributors, and sellers of Halloween products for children and adults was resolved on October 2, 2012, when the Alameda County Superior Court entered a Consent Judgment in Held v. Forum Novelties, Inc. et al.  The Halloween Group enforcement action resolved citizen enforcer Anthony E. Held, Ph.D., P.E.’s allegations that the defendant Easter Unlimited, Inc.

Case PDF: 
application/pdf iconheldv.halloweengroup100212.pdf
Plaintiff: 
Held
Defendant: 
Easter Unlimited, Inc.
Type: 
Consent Judgment
Relief: 
Reformulation, Vendor Notification
Monetary: 
$50,000-$59,999
Monetary Relief: 
Civil Penalties
Used By: 
Adults/Children
Cross-Post On: 
None

Held v. Halloween Group

Submitted by chirst on April 25, 2013
Date: 
October 2, 2012
Industry Categories: 
Apparel & Fashion Accessories
Furniture, Home Decorative, and Household Products
Featured: 
No

In 2011 The Chanler Group’s client, Anthony E. Held, Ph.D., P.E., commenced an investigation into Halloween products, which resulted in the enforcement action Held v. Forum Novelties, Inc., et al.  In this case, Dr. Held alleged that Forum Novelties, Inc.

Case PDF: 
application/pdf iconheldv.halloweengroup100212.pdf
Plaintiff: 
Held
Defendant: 
“Amscan Holdings, Inc.”, “Almar Sales Co, Inc.”, “Easter Unlimited, Inc.”, “Everstar, US”, “Forum Novelties, Inc.”, “Leg Avenue Inc.”, “Lovin’ Enterprises, Inc.”, “Morbid Enterprises, LLC”, “Paper Magic Group, Inc.”, “RG Costumes & Accessories, Inc.”, “Ellie Shoes, Inc.”, “Everstar Merchandise Co., Ltd.”, “In Character Costumes, Inc.”, “Jacobson Hat Co., Inc.”, “Elope, Inc.”, “Tomson Merchandise Co., Ltd.”
Type: 
Consent Judgment
Relief: 
Reformulation, Vendor Notification
Monetary: 
$760,000-$769,999
Monetary Relief: 
Civil Penalties
Used By: 
Adults/Children
Cross-Post On: 
None

Brimer v. Michigan Industrial Tools

Submitted by chirst on April 22, 2013
Date: 
June 26, 2012
Industry Categories: 
Hardware, Woodworking Power/Machine and Hand Tools
Featured: 
No

The Marin County Superior Court entered a Consent Judgment in Brimer v. Amash Imports, Inc., et al. on June 26, 2012.  This enforcement action resolved citizen enforcer Russell Brimer’s allegations that the defendants Amash Imports, Inc. (“Amash”) and Michigan Industrial Tools (“MIT”) sold hand tools with grips containing the heavy metal lead in the State of California without providing the requisite health hazard warnings. 

Case PDF: 
application/pdf iconbrimerv.mit062612.pdf
Plaintiff: 
Brimer
Defendant: 
Michigan Industrial Tools and Amash Imports, Inc.
Type: 
Consent Judgment
Relief: 
Reformulation
Monetary: 
$170,000-$179,999
Monetary Relief: 
Civil Penalties
Used By: 
Adults/Children
Cross-Post On: 
None

Brimer v. Aramco Imports, Inc.

Submitted by chirst on April 22, 2013
Date: 
March 6, 2012
Industry Categories: 
Decorated Glassware & Ceramicware
Glazed Ceramics
Featured: 
No

The dispute between citizen enforcer Russell Brimer and defendant Aramco Imports, Inc. that was originally resolved on November 20, 2009 in Brimer v.

Case PDF: 
application/pdf iconbrimerv.aramco030612.pdf
Plaintiff: 
Brimer
Defendant: 
Aramco Imports, Inc.
Type: 
Out-of-Court Settlement
Relief: 
Reformulation
Monetary: 
$30,000-$39,999
Monetary Relief: 
Civil Penalties
Used By: 
Adults/Children
Cross-Post On: 
None

Brimer v. Waterford Wedgwood PLC

Submitted by chirst on April 15, 2013
Date: 
December 20, 2007
Industry Categories: 
Decorated Glassware & Ceramicware
Featured: 
No

In the enforcement action Brimer v. Royal Doulton USA, Inc., et al., the Honorable Nancy L.

Case PDF: 
application/pdf iconbrimerv.waterford042908.pdf
Plaintiff: 
Brimer
Defendant: 
Waterford Wedgwood PLC
Type: 
Consent Judgment
Relief: 
Warnings, Reformulation
Monetary: 
$0-$9,999
Used By: 
Adults/Children
Cross-Post On: 
None

Brimer v. Wade Ceramics Ltd.

Submitted by chirst on April 15, 2013
Date: 
December 20, 2007
Industry Categories: 
Decorated Glassware & Ceramicware
Featured: 
No

In the enforcement action Brimer v. Royal Doulton USA, Inc., et al., the Honorable Nancy L. Davis approved a Consent Judgment on December 20, 2007.  The Consent Judgment included an opt-in program which provided citizen enforcer Russell Brimer with the ability to send 60-Day Notices of Violation to each entity that submitted an Opt-In Stipulation.  On April 29, 2008, settling defendant Wade Ceramics Ltd.

Case PDF: 
application/pdf iconbrimerv.wade042908.pdf
Plaintiff: 
Brimer
Defendant: 
Wade Ceramics Ltd.
Type: 
Consent Judgment
Relief: 
Warnings, Reformulation
Monetary: 
$0-$9,999
Used By: 
Adults/Children
Cross-Post On: 
None

Brimer v. Villeroy & Boch

Submitted by chirst on April 15, 2013
Date: 
December 20, 2007
Industry Categories: 
Decorated Glassware & Ceramicware
Featured: 
No

In the enforcement action Brimer v. Royal Doulton USA, Inc., et al., the Honorable Nancy L.

Case PDF: 
application/pdf iconbrimerv.villeroyboch042908.pdf
Plaintiff: 
Brimer
Defendant: 
Villeroy & Boch
Type: 
Consent Judgment
Relief: 
Warnings, Reformulation
Monetary: 
$0-$9,999
Used By: 
Adults/Children
Cross-Post On: 
None

Brimer v. The Royal Crown Derby Porcelain Co. Ltd.

Submitted by chirst on April 15, 2013
Date: 
December 20, 2007
Industry Categories: 
Decorated Glassware & Ceramicware
Featured: 
No

In the enforcement action Brimer v. Royal Doulton USA, Inc., et al., the Honorable Nancy L. Davis approved a Consent Judgment on December 20, 2007.  The Consent Judgment included an opt-in program which provided citizen enforcer Russell Brimer with the ability to send 60-Day Notices of Violation to each entity that submitted an Opt-In Stipulation.  On April 29, 2008, settling defendant The Royal Crown Derby Porcelain Co. Ltd.

Case PDF: 
application/pdf iconbrimerv.royalcrown042908.pdf
Plaintiff: 
Brimer
Defendant: 
The Royal Crown Derby Porcelain Co. Ltd.
Type: 
Consent Judgment
Relief: 
Warnings, Reformulation
Monetary: 
$0-$9,999
Used By: 
Adults/Children
Cross-Post On: 
None
Syndicate content