Communications Between The Chanler Group and the California Attorney General's Office

For more than 20 years, The Chanler Group (TCG) has successfully represented citizen enforcers in prosecuting Proposition 65 actions against companies offering products for sale in California that contain chemicals known to cause cancer and reproductive harm, without first providing the required health hazard warning.  The California Attorney General (CAG) is designated as the primary enforcer of Proposition 65 and also has responsibility for  reviewing 60-Day Notices and settlements.  Given TCG's prominence in bringing Proposition 65 actions  since 1992, and the CAG's role as the primary enforcer of Proposition 65, TCG and the CAG have a long-standing relationship .

Below is a selection of some of the communicaitons exchanged over the years between TCG attorneys and the California Attorney General's Office. 

recent posts - CA Attorney General Correspondence

April 4, 2012
The California Attorney General (“CAG”) sent a letter to The Chanler Group (“TCG”) regarding the factual information supporting the Certificate of Merit accompanying the Second Supplemental 60-Day Notice served on Kiss Nail Products and Kiss Products ("Kiss") by Dr. Anthony Held. ("CAG letter," included below).  For reasons stated in the letter, the CAG asked Dr. Held to withdraw his Second Supplemental Notice to Kiss.  The CAG sent a copy... full text
January 10, 2012
The California Attorney General (“CAG”) sent a letter to Proposition 65 plaintiffs and their attorneys regarding release language used in settlement agreements between citizen enforcers and alleged violators.  The letter suggested replacement language that should be used in release provisions. Release provisions in the public interest that are contained in settlement agreements negotiated by clients of The Chanler Group are narrowly tailored to the violations alleged in the... full text
December 22, 2010
The California Attorney General (“CAG”) sent a letter to Proposition 65 plaintiffs and counsel regarding its concerns about offsetting penalty payments in private Proposition 65 actions with payments in lieu of penalties and requested the recipients’ feedback regarding the issue. full text
March 3, 2008
The California Attorney General’s office (“CAG”) wrote to Hirst & Chanler LLP (“H&C”), the predecessor firm to The Chanler Group, regarding Proposition 65 actions commenced by H&C clients alleging that certain lipsticks containing lead were being offered for sale in California without the required health hazard warning. full text
September 17, 2007
On September 4, 2007, the California Attorney General (“CAG”) filed an objection to a joint motion for approval of a Proposition 65 settlement and consent judgment in Leeman v. Burger King Corporation, CKE Restaurants, Inc. et al. (Sacramento County Superior Court, Case No. 06AS02168).  The CAG objected to the amount of attorneys' fees agreed to in the settlement, compensation to be paid to Dr. Whitney Leeman for her efforts, and to Dr. Leeman's documentation supporting... full text
June 6, 2007
On May 11, 2007, the California Attorney General (“CAG”) sent a letter to Hirst & Chanler LLP (“H&C”), the predecessor firm to The Chanler Group, regarding the manner in which H&C and their clients pursued Proposition 65 matters involving lead in the surface coatings of glassware and ceramicware. On June 6, 2007, on behalf of H&C, Clifford Chanler sent a letter in response to the CAG. Copies of each letter appear below. full text
May 23, 2007
The California Attorney General’s office (“CAG”) sent a letter to Hirst & Chanler (“H&C”), the predecessor firm to The Chanler Group, in response to a letter H&C had sent to the California Public Health Trust on May 8, 2007, advising the Public Health Trust that H&C would be seeking to modify the settlements of three cases to change the use of the settlement funds.  full text
July 20, 2006
The California Attorney General (“CAG”) sent a letter addressed to all attorneys who had served the CAG with notices of violation under Proposition 65 since January 1, 2005. The purpose of the letter was to list the mandatory elements of Proposition 65 notices to be served on alleged violators and public prosecutors, including the CAG.  full text