Our Mission: We are igniting a movement that inspires parents to protect young children from harmful chemicals. Donate ยป
Charity Navigator 4 Star CharityBlog
State of California Sues 20 Toy Companies Over Toxic Lead Contents
Healthy Child
Wednesday, November 21, 2007
California Attorney General Jerry Brown has sued 20 companies including Mattel and Toys R Us for violating Prop 65. The lawsuit alleges that the companies were in violation of the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986 also known as Prop 65 due to unlawful amounts of lead contained in their toys.
The voter approved law requires that companies notify California consumers about toys containing high amounts of lead. According to the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, companies can be fined up $2,500 per violation per day for failing to provide notices required by Prop 65.
The lawsuit comes after a plague of recent toy recalls across the nation due to toxic ingredients. As allowed by Prop 65, the State Attorney General took over suit notices originally filed by three nonprofits: Center for Environmental Health, Environmental Law Foundation, and As You Sow.
Lead is a heavy metal that is highly toxic to children's brains and nervous systems, even at low levels and can be found in toys, paint, and even pipes holding your drinking water. Parents should be especially vigilant during the holiday season because many ornaments and decorations contain lead as well as Christmas tree lights and aritificial trees. If a child has high levels of heavy metals in his or her body, immediate medical treatment is necessary. Medical tests can determine how much of the metal is present and how to address the problem, as well as how much damage may have already been caused.
Posted by sara j on 04/29 at 07:18 PM
So if the companies did not provide notices of lead levels, that means countless children were exposed. What happens next? What are the legal rights of those who were exposed to toxic levels of lead by companies violating the law? Is this per se negligence?
I’m sure there are plenty of <A HREF=“http://www.avvo.com/personal-injury-defective-dangerous-products-law/ca.html”>California dangerous product lawyers</A> that would be willing to take this case. It is, after all, somewhat of a slam dunk. The only problem, I suppose, is proving damages if the children are not manifesting any symptoms of lead poisoning.