Vinocur v. Houston’s, Inc.

The parties involved in the case Vinocur v. Houston’s, Inc. executed a Consent Judgment on January 13, 2017.  In this matter, citizen enforcer Laurence Vinocur alleged that Houston’s, Inc. (“Houston”) sold chairs with vinyl/PVC upholstery containing the phthalate chemical di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (“DEHP”) and chairs 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 agreement, Houston agreed not to sell any chairs with vinyl/PVC upholstery or chairs with foam padding in California after the Alameda County Superior Court approves the Judgment, unless the products contain no more than 1,000 parts per million (“ppm”) of DEHP and no more than 25 ppm of TDCPP, tris(2-chloroethyl)phosphate (“TCEP”), and/or tris(2,3-dibromopropyl)phosphate (“TDBPP”) when analyzed using state or federally approved testing methodologies, OR have Proposition 65 warnings provided.

The Consent Judgment required settlement payments of up to $33,000, 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.