Brimer v. ETS Express, Inc, et al.

The San Francisco County Superior court entered a Consent Judgment in Brimer v. ETS Express, Inc., et al on December 12, 2006. In this matter, citizen enforcer Russell Brimer alleged that The Vernon Company ("Vernon") sold ceramicware with colored artwork containing the heavy metal lead on the exterior in the State of California without providing the requisite health hazard warnings.

As part of the settlement, Vernon agreed not to sell the specific ceramicware identified in the Consent Judgment in California after December 8, 2006, unless the ceramicware has Proposition 65 warnings provided or complies with the reformulation standards when analyzed using state or federally approved testing methodologies. Vernon commits to undertake good faith efforts to ensure that as much ceramicware as reasonably possible that is offered for sale in California after July 1, 2007, qualifies as reformulated. Additionally, by December 31, 2006, Vernon shall notify its suppliers and sales representatives that it only accepts decorated ceramicware that is reformulated or labeled with Proposition 65 warnings. As incentive for reformulation, Brimer agreed to potential penalty reductions as outlined in Section 3.1 of the Consent Judgment.

The Consent Judgment requires settlement payments of $46,000, to be divided therein between civil penalties, 75% of which are paid to California's Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, and compensation to whistleblower Brimer and his counsel for their successful enforcement of this matter in the public interest.